Tag Archives: Jan

U.S. House Jan. 6 committee votes to subpoena Trump

WASHINGTON, Oct 13 (Reuters) – The U.S. House of Representatives committee probing the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol by Donald Trump’s supporters voted unanimously on Thursday to subpoena the former president, a move that could lead to criminal charges if he does not comply.

The House select committee’s seven Democratic and two Republican members voted 9-0 in favor of issuing a subpoena for Trump to provide documents and testimony under oath in connection with the storming of the Capitol.

“He must be accountable. He is required to answer for his actions. He is required to answer for those police officers who put their lives and bodies on the line to defend our democracy. He is required to answer to those millions of Americans whose votes he wanted to throw out as part of his scheme to remain in power,” the panel’s Democratic chairman, Representative Bennie Thompson, said.

Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

The vote came after the committee spent more than two hours making its case – via statements from members, documents, and recorded testimony – that Trump planned to deny his 2020 election defeat in advance, failed to call off the thousands of supporters who stormed the Capitol, and followed through with his false claims that the election was stolen even as close advisers told him he had lost.

Federal law says that failure to comply with a congressional subpoena is a misdemeanor, punishable by one to 12 months imprisonment. If the select committee’s subpoena is ignored, the full House must vote on whether to make a referral to the Department of Justice, which has the authority to decide whether to bring charges.

LOOMING MID-TERMS

The subpoena is expected within days, and would typically give Trump a date by which he should comply. It was not clear when the full House – which is out of Washington until mid-November – could vote on whether to make a criminal referral.

Trump responded to the vote with angry comments on his social media service Truth Social. “Why did they wait until the very end, the final moments of their last meeting? Because the Committee is a total ‘BUST’ that has only served to further divide our Country which, by the way, is doing very badly – A laughing stock all over the World?” he wrote.

One former Trump adviser, Steve Bannon, is due to be sentenced next week after a jury found him guilty of contempt of Congress charges for not complying with a committee subpoena. But the Justice Department declined to charge another, Mark Meadows, who the House had also suggested should be prosecuted.

Federal prosecutors are also investigating the former president’s removal of classified documents from the White House at the end of his term, and have warned that they believe they have not yet recovered all the documents taken.

The House select committee has been investigating the attack on the Capitol, which left more than 140 police officers injured and led to several deaths, for more than a year, interviewing over 1,000 witnesses.

Thompson said he recognized that subpoenaing a former president was a serious action, but argued that the stakes were high for the future of U.S. democracy.

Thursday’s meeting followed eight hearings earlier this year and one in July 2021. There were no live witnesses on Thursday, but the panel presented videotaped testimony to build a case that Trump’s efforts to overturn his November 2020 presidential election defeat constituted illegal conduct, far beyond normal politics.

FEARS OF VIOLENCE

The committee presented evidence from Secret Service agents and intelligence officials who said before Jan.6 that they expected violence at the pro-Trump rally and believed there were caches of weapons around Washington.

“Their plan is to literally kill people. Please please take this tip seriously and investigate further,” a Dec. 26 Secret Service email said.

Thursday’s vote could be the committee’s last public action before the Nov. 8 midterm elections that will determine whether President Joe Biden’s fellow Democrats or Trump’s Republicans control Congress.

The committee is also due to release a report on its findings within the coming weeks.

Representative Liz Cheney, the panel’s Republican vice chairperson, said the panel might ultimately decide to make a series of criminal referrals to the Department of Justice.

The hearings held this year may have convinced some Republicans that Trump bears some responsibility for the attack. A two-day Reuters/Ipsos poll concluded on Wednesday showed two in five Republicans view Trump as at least partly responsible for the attack.

Previous hearings focused on Trump’s inaction before and during the storming of the Capitol, his pressure on Vice President Mike Pence to deny Biden’s victory, militias whose members participated in the attack, and Trump’s interactions with close advisers questioning his false allegations of massive voter fraud.

The one-time reality television star has denied wrongdoing and hinted he will seek the White House again in 2024. He regularly holds rallies where he continues to claim falsely that he lost the election because of widespread fraud.

More than 880 people have been arrested in connection with the violence, with more than 400 guilty pleas so far.

Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

Reporting by Patricia Zengerle, Moira Warburton and Doina Chiacu; Additional reporting by Jason Lange; Editing by Scott Malone, Aurora Ellis and Rosalba O’Brien

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Read original article here

Jan. 6 panel: Live updates from hearing

WASHINGTON (AP) — The House Jan. 6 committee voted unanimously Thursday to subpoena former President Donald Trump, demanding his personal testimony as it unveiled startling new video and described his multi-part plan to overturn his 2020 election loss, which led to his supporters’ fierce assault on the U.S. Capitol.

With alarming messages from the U.S. Secret Service warning of violence and vivid new video of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other congressional leaders pleading for help, the panel showed the raw desperation at the Capitol. Using language frequently seen in criminal indictments, the panel said Trump had acted in a “premeditated” way ahead of Jan. 6, 2021, despite countless aides and officials telling him he had lost.

Trump is almost certain to fight the subpoena and decline to testify. On his social media outlet he blasted members for not asking him earlier — though he didn’t say he would have complied — and called the panel “a total BUST.”

“We must seek the testimony under oath of January 6′s central player,” said Republican Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming, the committee’s vice chair, ahead of the vote.

In the committee’s 10th public session, just weeks before the congressional midterm elections, the panel summed up Trump’s “staggering betrayal” of his oath of office, as Chairman Bennie Thompson put it, describing the then-president’s unprecedented attempt to stop Congress from certifying Democrat Joe Biden’s victory.

While the effort to subpoena Trump may languish, more a nod to history than an effective summons, the committee has made clear it is considering whether to send its findings in a criminal referral to the Justice Department.

In one of its most riveting exhibits, the panel showed previously unseen footage of congressional leaders phoning for help during the assault as Trump refused to call off the mob.

Pelosi can be seen on a call with the governor of neighboring Virginia, explaining as she shelters with Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer and others that the governor of Maryland has also been contacted. Later, the video shows Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell and other GOP leaders as the group asks the Defense Department for help.

“They’re breaking the law in many different ways,” Pelosi says at one point. “And quite frankly, much of it at the instigation of the president of the United States.”

The footage also portrays Vice President Mike Pence — not Trump — stepping in to help calm the violence, telling Pelosi and the others he has spoken with Capitol Police, as Congress plans to resume its session that night to certify Biden’s election.

The video was from Pelosi’s daughter, Alexandra, a documentary filmmaker.

In never-before-seen Secret Service messages, the panel produced evidence that extremist groups provided the muscle in the fight for Trump’s presidency, planning weeks before the attack to send a violent force to Washington.

The Secret Service warned in a Dec. 26, 2020, email of a tip that members of the right-wing Proud Boys planned to outnumber the police in a march in Washington on Jan. 6.

“It felt like the calm before the storm,” one Secret Service agent wrote in a group chat.

To describe the president’s mindset, the committee presented new and previously seen material, including interviews with Trump’s top aides and Cabinet officials — including Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Attorney General William Barr and Labor Secretary Eugene Scalia — in which some described the president acknowledging he had lost.

Ex-White House official Alyssa Farah Griffin said Trump once looked up at a television and said, “Can you believe I lost to this (expletive) guy?”

Cabinet members also said in interviews shown at the hearing that they believed that once legal avenues had been exhausted, that should have been the end of Trump’s efforts to remain in power.

“In my view, that was the end of the matter,” Barr said of the Dec. 14 vote of the Electoral College.

But rather than the end of Trump’s efforts, it was only the beginning — as the president summoned the crowd to Washington on Jan. 6.

The panel showed clips of Trump at his rally near the White House that day saying the opposite of what he had been told. He then tells supporters he will march with them to the Capitol. That never happened.

“There is no defense that Donald Trump was duped or irrational,” said Cheney. “No president can defy the rule of law and act this way in our constitutional republic, period.”

Thursday’s hearing opened at a mostly empty Capitol complex, with most lawmakers at home campaigning. Several people who were among the thousands around the Capitol on Jan. 6 are now running for congressional office, some with Trump’s backing. Police officers who fought the mob filled the hearing room’s front row.

The House panel said the insurrection at the Capitol was not an isolated incident but a warning of the fragility of the nation’s democracy in the post-Trump era.

“None of this is normal,” Cheney said.

Along with interviews, the committee is drawing on the trove of 1.5 million pages of documents it received from the Secret Service, including an email from Dec. 11, 2020, the day the Supreme Court rejected one of the main lawsuits Trump’s team had brought against the election results.

“Just fyi. POTUS is pissed,” the Secret Service message said.

White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson, a top aide to then-chief of staff Mark Meadows, recalled Trump being “fired up” about the court’s ruling.

Trump told Meadows “something to the effect of: ‘I don’t want people to know we lost, Mark. This is embarrassing. Figure it out,’” Hutchinson told the panel in a recorded interview.

Thursday’s session served as a closing argument for the panel’s two Republican lawmakers, Cheney of Wyoming and Adam Kinzinger of Illinois, who have essentially been shunned by Trump and their party and will not be returning in the new Congress. Cheney lost her primary election, and Kinzinger decided not to run.

The committee, having conducted more than 1,000 interviews and obtained countless documents, has produced a sweeping probe of Trump’s activities from his defeat in the November election to the Capitol attack.

Under committee rules, the Jan. 6 panel is to produce a report of its findings, likely in December. The committee will dissolve 30 days after publication of that report, and with the new Congress in January.

At least five people died in the Jan. 6 attack and its aftermath, including a Trump supporter shot and killed by Capitol Police.

More than 850 people have been charged by the Justice Department, some receiving lengthy prison sentences for their roles. Several leaders and associates of the extremist Oath Keepers and Proud Boys have been charged with sedition.

Trump faces various state and federal investigations over his actions in the election and its aftermath.

___

Associated Press writers Mary Clare Jalonick, Jill Colvin, Kevin Freking and Michael Balsamo contributed to this report.

More on Donald Trump-related investigations: https://apnews.com/hub/donald-trump

Read original article here

Secret Service knew of Capitol threat more than a week before Jan. 6

The Secret Service had warnings earlier than previously known that supporters of President Donald Trump were plotting an armed attack on the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, according to records revealed in a congressional hearing Thursday.

Secret Service agents in charge of assessing the risks around the protests had been tracking online chats on pro-Trump websites and noted that rallygoers were vowing to bring firearms, target the Capitol for a siege and even kill Vice President Mike Pence.

As early as Dec. 26, Secret Service officials were sharing one tipster’s warnings about extremist groups coming to the Capitol with murderous plans. “They think they will have a large enough group to march into DC armed and will outnumber the police so they can’t be stopped,” the tip read.

“Their plan is to literally kill people,” the tipster wrote. “Please, please take this tip seriously and investigate further.”

The evidence presented at the hearing adds the Secret Service to a long list of national security agencies who received prescient warnings about the assault protesters planned for Jan. 6, yet failed to respond with urgency or cohesion to prevent the insurrection.

Jan. 6 committee member Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.) said the new details — retrieved in internal emails from a trove of more than a 1 million records the Secret Service provided the House panel — raise questions about how the agency shared its intelligence and whether officials have been forthright about their knowledge of the warnings.

As we have seen, the Secret Service and other agencies knew of the prospect of violence well in advance of the president’s speech at the Ellipse,” Schiff said during the hearing. “Despite this, certain White House and Secret Service witnesses previously testified that they had received no intelligence about violence that could have potentially threatened any of their protectees on January 6th, including the vice president. Evidence strongly suggests that this testimony is not credible.”

In a statement, Secret Service Deputy Director Faron K. Paramore noted that the agency is not a “member of the Intelligence Community” and said it had shared its information widely with others.

“In the weeks leading up to Jan. 6, Secret Service was in constant communication and sharing information with our law enforcement partners in the Washington, D.C. area regarding available protective intelligence and open-source information concerning potential violence,” said Paramore.

Much of the intelligence cited in Thursday’s hearing was alarming in its specificity. One Secret Service unit, Schiff said, flagged a social media account on a pro-Trump site that threatened to bring a sniper rifle to Washington.

“Intelligence about this risk was directly available to the U.S. Secret Service and others in the White House in advance of the speech, in advance of the march to the Capitol,” Schiff said.

In a Dec. 30 email, a Secret Service agent warned of Trump supporters’ online threats, noting the U.S. Marshals Service was “seeing a lot of violent rhetoric directed at government people, entities, in addition to our protected persons.” The protected person most targeted for attack: the vice president.

On the morning of the rally, Schiff noted, the Secret Service knew many of the protesters in the crowd on the Ellipse had weapons, but it’s unclear what steps the agency took as a result. It is a crime to carry a firearm on federal property. Trump was scheduled to speak a little after noon.

Secret Service units shared reports from police that morning that they had seen rallygoers with firearms, including a Glock, a pistol, and a rifle. They knew D.C. police had reportedly detained a person carrying an assault rifle.

At the same time, they were getting reports of death threats against Pence, who had just entered the U.S. Capitol that morning to perform his role in certifying the election.

“Alert at 1022 regarding VP being a dead man walking if he doesn’t do the right thing,” one Secret Service email warned at 10:39 a.m.

By 12:36, as Trump took the stage, one Secret Service employee emailed another about the barely hidden threat all around them.

“With so many weapons found so far, you wonder how many are unknown” one Secret Service employee wrote to a colleague. “Could be sporty after dark,” he wrote, referring to the chance for gun battles.

“No doubt,” his colleague wrote back. “The people at the Ellipse said they are moving to the Capitol after the POTUS speech.”

Read original article here

Jan. 6 panel scrutinizes Trump’s Afghanistan order post-election

President Donald Trump ordered the Pentagon to rapidly pull all U.S. troops from Afghanistan and Somalia in the immediate aftermath of his 2020 election loss to Joe Biden, alarming senior aides who feared doing so would have “catastrophic” consequences, according to congressional testimony aired Thursday.

Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.) cited Trump’s order during a House select committee hearing scrutinizing the former president’s actions and directives ahead of the U.S. Capitol riot on Jan. 6, 2021. It was evidence, the congressman said, that Trump knew his days in office were numbered as he sought to overturn Biden’s election win and “rushed” to complete “unfinished business” despite the national security implications.

“He disregarded concerns about the consequences for fragile governments on the front lines of the fight against [the Islamic State] and al-Qaeda terrorists,” Kinzinger said. “Knowing he was leaving office, he acted immediately and signed this order on November 11th, which would have required the immediate withdrawal of troops from Somalia and Afghanistan, all to be complete before the Biden inauguration on January 20th.”

Trump’s withdrawal order was reported previously by Axios and in the book “Peril,” by journalists Bob Woodward and Robert Costa. Kinzinger’s presentation, however, marked a dramatic moment in Thursday’s hearing, as the committee played video and audio segments of testimony provided over the past several months by key officials troubled by the president’s plans, including Army Gen. Mark A. Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff; and retired Army Lt. Gen. Keith Kellogg, who served as national security adviser to Vice President Mike Pence.

The Afghanistan plan ultimately was set aside. Milley called the order “odd” and “potentially dangerous,” telling the committee he did not think it was feasible or wise. Kellogg said the proposition was “very contested,” and that carrying it out would have been a “tremendous disservice to [the] nation.”

“It’s the same thing with President Biden,” Kellogg said, comparing the situation to the chaotic and deadly withdrawal carried out at Biden’s direction in August 2021. “It would have been a debacle.”

John McEntee, an adviser to Trump, recalled typing up the order to withdraw from Afghanistan and securing Trump’s signature on it. He did not offer an assessment similar to Milley’s and Kellogg’s in testimony aired Thursday.

For U.S. troops who survived Kabul airport disaster, guilt and grief endure

Their comments add to public understanding of key military moves that bridge the two presidencies, and the often erratic nature of deliberations under Trump.

The Trump administration, in February 2020, signed a deal with the Taliban agreeing to remove all U.S. troops by spring 2021. It included a handful of concessions, including that the Taliban would hold fire against U.S. troops as they departed. The Afghan government was cut out of those discussions.

Trump later undermined that agreement, tweeting in October of that year that all U.S. troops should be “home by Christmas!” Then-Defense Secretary Mark T. Esper sent Trump a memo advising the president that ongoing Taliban attacks, potential danger for remaining U.S. personnel and risks to U.S. alliances made that timeline unworkable.

Mark Esper on Trump: ‘There were a lot of bad ideas being proposed’

Trump fired Esper on Nov. 9, one day after the election loss, installing loyalists at the Pentagon at a moment when administrations typically seek a smooth transition on issues of national security.

Biden decided in April 2021 to follow through with the Afghanistan withdrawal, prompting the collapse of the country’s government four months later. Biden administration officials blamed Trump, saying his deal with the Taliban left few alternatives, while former Trump administration officials sought to distance themselves from the agreement by arguing that it was meant to be implemented only if the conditions warranted.

Trump has criticized Biden for the haphazard exit, calling it a “humiliation” and “total surrender,” and claiming it would not have happened on his watch.

“We could have gotten out with honor,” Trump said at a rally last year. “We should have gotten out with honor. And instead we got out with the exact opposite of honor.”

Alyssa Farah Griffin, a former Trump administration official who has become a frequent critic, tweeted Thursday that as “someone who remains highly critical of Biden’s Afghanistan withdrawal,” she’d be curious to hear how Trump supporters defend “Trump’s order for an even hastier withdrawal.”

Under Trump’s direction, hundreds of U.S. troops were withdrawn from Somalia in the waning weeks of his administration. Some were redeployed to nearby Kenya while continuing to visit Somalia to advise local troops battling al-Qaeda-affiliated militants.

In May, Biden reversed Trump’s Somalia order, deploying hundreds of U.S. troops there. Pentagon officials sought presidential approval to do so, advising that it was becoming increasingly unsustainable to only appear on the ground episodically to carry out operations. The Pentagon has conducted a handful of airstrikes in Somalia since then.



Read original article here

House Jan. 6 committee hearing expected to focus on Trump’s mindset after 2020 election


Jan. 6 hearings resume for what could be last public hearing

03:21

Committee aides would not say whether they had any further engagement with Trump or former Vice President Mike Pence about testifying. Pence said this summer that he’d “consider” testifying before the committee.

Rep. Bennie Thompson, the committee chair, said last month that the committee plans to put together an interim report in mid-October, with a final report to come before the end of the year, after the midterm elections.

The committee held a series of public hearings over the summer that were also broadcast nationally. The hearings showed never-before-seen video from the attack but also showed video testimony from Trump administration officials about his refusal to accept election results and plans by his allies to replace electors in battleground states that President Joe Biden won while also threatening local and state elections officials

Thompson confirmed over the summer that the committee has been having “conversations” with the Justice Department about the phony elector plan. In the June 21 public hearing, committee member Rep. Adam Schiff said those fake electors ultimately met on Dec. 14, 2020, in Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, New Mexico, Nevada and Wisconsin, signing documents claiming they were duly elected electors from their state. 

The committee said that GOP Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin wanted to hand deliver alternate, fraudulent electors to Pence ahead of the joint session of Congress, according to texts the committee provided.

The hearings highlighted Trump and his allies’ pressure campaigns on different branches of government to overturn the 2020 election results, including the former president’s attempt to install environmental lawyer Jeffrey Clark at the helm of the Justice Department, attorney John Eastman’s argument to Pence that he had the power to override the Electoral College, and Rudy Giuliani’s attempts to influence local and state elections officials.

The hearings also featured in-person testimony from former Trump administration officials, a former Fox News political editor, a Capitol police officer, a rioter who pleaded guilty, among others.

The hearings included bombshell revelations about Trump’s reaction to the Jan. 6 attack.

Hutchinson and other former White House aides testified – both in person and on video testimony – that they knew Trump had lost the election and that pushing the narrative that he had won was a lie. Sarah Matthews, a former deputy press secretary, testified that as violence erupted at the Capitol, the press office was arguing over Trump’s response and seemed taken aback that a colleague didn’t want to condemn the rioting because doing so would be “handing a win to the media.”

“I couldn’t believe that we were arguing over this in the middle of the West Wing .. And so, I motioned up at the TV and said, ‘Do you think it looks like we’re f’ing winning? Because I don’t think it does,'” Matthews said. 

In that same hearing, the committee played a never-before-seen video showing Trump rehearsing to give a statement on Jan. 7, 2021. Even after the mayhem of Jan. 6 and that Congress had certified the Electoral College count, Trump refused to say he had lost the election. 

“I would like to begin by addressing the heinous attack yesterday, and to those who broke the law, you will pay,” Trump said in the footage. “You do not represent our movement, you do not represent our country, and if you broke the law — can’t say that. I already said you will pay…”

“But this election is now over. Congress has certified the results,” he continued, before stopping and presumably addressing his aides. “I don’t want to say the election’s over. I just want to say Congress has certified the results without saying the election’s over.” 

Read original article here

Oath Keepers on trial were in touch with Secret Service before Jan. 6

The founder of the Oath Keepers and other leaders of the self-styled militia movement were in contact with Secret Service officials multiple times in late 2020 and leading up to the attack on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, according to an agency official and court testimony in Stewart Rhodes’s ongoing seditious conspiracy trial.

A former member of the Oath Keepers testified last week that the group’s founder Stewart Rhodes claimed to be in touch with someone in the Secret Service in the months before the riot. A Secret Service official confirmed that members of the agency’s protective intelligence division reached out to the Oath Keepers in advance of protests in D.C. in November and December as well as the Jan. 6 “Stop the Steal” rally.

Agents regularly engage in such advance contact with protest groups expected to attend public presidential events, the official said. The goal is to explain what items are prohibited and learn more about the protesters’ numbers and plans to assess the risk to protected officials.

Rhodes and four associates are now in the midst of a trial expected to last at least a month, in which they face the most serious charges of the criminal investigation into the Capitol riot. Jurors have heard evidence that prosecutors say shows the Oath Keepers wanted to keep Donald Trump in power by force, trial testimony that comes just as the House committee investigating Jan. 6 prepared for what is expected to be its final public hearing Thursday.

The House committee is expected to highlight Secret Service records indicating Trump received multiple warnings on Jan. 6 about rising danger at the Capitol yet continued to insist on traveling there himself, according to people briefed on the records, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive internal records.

The full extent of what intelligence the Secret Service received from the Oath Keepers is unclear.

John Zimmerman, a former Oath Keeper from North Carolina, testified that he believed Rhodes talked to a Secret Service agent in September 2020 about what weapons they could be carrying while “working” a Trump rally in Fayetteville, N.C. In response to that testimony, a Secret Service spokesman said that “it is not uncommon for various organizations to contact the agency concerning security restrictions and activities that are permissible in proximity to our protected sites.”

Veteran D.C. protesters say they rarely deal with the Secret Service compared with other agencies.

“Out of all of the demonstrations I ever planned in D.C. over the past 15 years, the one agency I’ve had the least amount of interaction with is the Secret Service,” said Robby Diesu, who has organized protests for various progressive causes.

But most D.C. protests don’t involve organized armed groups known for advocating violent resistance to government authority.

A D.C. police lieutenant was put on leave for his contacts with longtime Proud Boys chairman Henry “Enrique” Tarrio, who is set to go on trial in December on charges similar to those faced by the Oath Keepers. The same lieutenant also reached out to a man he believed led a white-supremacist group. Experts said it makes sense for law enforcement personnel to seek information from extremist groups but that interactions must be handled with care to avoid misinterpretation.

Rhodes and other Oath Keepers have argued that they were regularly in touch with law enforcement and left their firearms outside D.C. because they had no intention of breaking the law on Jan. 6. In multiple encrypted chat conversations before the riot, Rhodes expresses hope that Trump would invoke the Insurrection Act, which he argued would “nullify” D.C. gun laws and all other restrictions on violent behavior.

“I have to try to get Trump the message on the necessity of him waging war on the enemy NOW while still President and Commander in Chief,” he wrote to one group of Oath Keepers on Dec. 14, 2020. He said he had stayed in D.C. to press the president, had “passed that message on through one contact” was “working on others.”

Rhodes was in contact with Roger Stone, a close confidant of the former president who was guarded by Oath Keepers on the morning of Jan. 6. Stone denies any involvement in the riot; he is also expected to be a focus of Thursday’s House committee hearing.

Trump never called on private militias to act as his defense force, and prosecutors argue that the law would not have allowed it. They note that Rhodes repeatedly said that the group would fight Joe Biden with or without Trump’s approval.

“He needs to know that if he doesn’t do it, we will,” Rhodes said of Trump in a Dec. 29, 2020, message read in court. “And if we have to do it ourselves, without him as Commander in Chief, it will be exponentially harder, and many more of us will die.”

When members of the Oath Keepers went into a VIP section at Trump’s speech on Jan. 6, the Secret Service required them to go leave tactical gear outside and go through metal detectors, another former member of the group testified Wednesday.

Former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson told the House committee earlier this year that Trump wanted the metal detectors removed despite being told members of the crowd were armed.

“They’re not here to hurt me,” Hutchinson recalled him saying.

Spencer S. Hsu, Tom Jackman and Ellie Silverman contributed to this report.

Read original article here

Trump, briefed on violence Jan 6, sought to stoke it

The probably final public hearing of the House committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol is expected to highlight newly obtained Secret Service records showing how President Donald Trump was repeatedly alerted to brewing violence that day, and he still sought to stoke the conflict, according to three people briefed on the records.

The committee plans to share in Thursday’s hearing new video footage and internal Secret Service emails that appear to corroborate parts of the most startling inside accounts of that day, said the people briefed, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive internal records. Former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson testified in June that Trump was briefed on Jan. 6 that some of his supporters were armed for battle, demanded they be allowed into his rally and insisted he wanted to lead them on their march to the Capitol.

Surveillance footage the committee plans to share was taken near the Ellipse that morning before Trump’s speech and shows throngs of his supporters clustered just outside the corralled area for his “Stop the Steal” rally. Secret Service officers screened those entering who sought to get closer to the stage. Law enforcement officials who were monitoring video that morning spotted Trump supporters with plastic shields, bulletproof vests and other paramilitary gear, and some in the Secret Service concluded they stayed outside the rally area to avoid having their weapons confiscated, according to people familiar with the new records.

Other internal emails likely to be revealed at the hearing further buttress accounts about staff members warning Trump about the risk and then the reality of violence that day, as he continued to press nervous Secret Service agents to take him to the Capitol to join his supporters marching there, the three people said. After being alerted to violence erupting at the Capitol when he returned to the White House, Trump tweeted criticism of Vice President Mike Pence for not blocking the certification of the election, whipping up supporters who had already trampled over security barricades and were battling police to break into the halls of Congress.

The newly obtained Secret Service records are just part of a larger hearing in which the committee hopes to summarize and remind the American public of all the ways Trump is said to have played a central role in fomenting a violent insurrection at the Capitol, one of the most brutal attacks on democracy in U.S. history, according to multiple people briefed on the evidence and committee plan. While the committee’s previous hearings took center stage over several weeks this summer, the committee is trying to revive interest in its probe and deliver what it has privately called its “closing arguments” about past and ongoing threats to democracy as voters prepare to cast ballots next month in the midterm elections.

The hearing aims to highlight new evidence gathered by investigators that corroborates the committee’s key findings about Trump and the Jan. 6 insurrection, according to the people briefed: that he sought to rile up his supporters to help block the certification of Joe Biden’s electoral victory; used his bully pulpit to encourage a fiery showdown at the Capitol; and then refused to budge to help rescue thousands of lawmakers, staff members and police officers on Capitol Hill who were either fleeing or fighting for their lives that afternoon.

It’s unclear, however, if the new material will shed any light on a particularly dramatic part of Hutchinson’s testimony, in which she recounted a senior Secret Service official telling her that Trump had erupted in anger and lunged at the lead security agent in his motorcade when told he could not go to the Capitol.

Email shows question over Trump’s plans

One email the committee has obtained highlights the level of alarm inside Secret Service headquarters on Jan. 6 about the possibility that Trump would get his wish to head to the Capitol — and join a melee in progress.

By 1 p.m. Eastern time that day, according to police testimony, hand-to-hand combat between protesters and officers was breaking out on the steps and platforms immediately outside the Capitol. The Secret Service had just then offered to send reinforcements to help an overwhelmed U.S. Capitol Police force, according to texts and testimony from then-Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund.

The new correspondence obtained by the committee shows that while Trump was still speaking to his supporters and announcing he was going to the Capitol, Secret Service personnel in charge of transportation and field operations scrambled to try to secure a safe motorcade route for the president and his entourage, two people briefed on the records said. The Secret Service staff members sought D.C. police help to block intersections. But with tens of thousands of protesters in downtown Washington, and D.C. police being dispatched to help Capitol Police with protesters breaking through barricades, D.C. police declined the Secret Service’s request.

About 1:10 p.m., Trump had left the Ellipse in his motorcade after finishing his speech, and demanded to go to the Capitol. Trump’s detail leader, Bobby Engel, riding with Trump in his sport utility vehicle, told an enraged Trump that they were heading back to the White House and it was not safe to take him to the Capitol, The Washington Post previously reported.

A guide to the biggest moments in the Jan. 6 hearings so far

“We don’t have the assets,” Engel told Trump of the inability to secure safe passage for his motorcade, according to a Secret Service official briefed on Engel’s account. By about 1:20 p.m., Trump was back at the White House.

One of the committee’s newly obtained documents shows that sometime between 1:30 and 2 p.m., a senior Secret Service supervisor for protective operations emailed Engel with an urgent update and seeking to know if Trump’s plan to go to the Capitol was successfully quashed. It came after a tumultuous hour for the Secret Service detail, which had effectively ignored a command from the president.

Even with Trump back at the White House, Secret Service headquarters wanted to be sure the president was staying put. The supervisor, Ron Rowe, warned Engel that the situation was rapidly devolving at the Capitol and sought Engel’s confirmation he was not considering taking Trump there, according to a senior law enforcement official familiar with the records turned over to the committee. Rowe urged Engel to call him.

Rowe declined to comment, but Secret Service spokesman Anthony Guglielmi said Rowe’s email reflected the larger agency’s position: Trump’s idea of going to the Capitol was a non-starter.

In other internal emails, agents relayed reports that Trump was angry about being told he couldn’t go to the Capitol.

Some of the information, the people briefed said, calls into question the previous testimony of Engel and Anthony Ornato, then a Secret Service leader who was serving in an unprecedented political role of White House deputy chief of staff. Both men told the committee in closed-door depositions that they could not recall certain events relayed by other witnesses, including Trump’s demand that the Secret Service let armed people into his rally.

After Hutchinson testified that Ornato told her that Trump had lunged at Engel inside the sport utility vehicle they were traveling in, anonymous Secret Service sources said that Engel and Ornato disputed any altercation occurred and were prepared to say so under oath. The committee has not yet re-interviewed the two men, as lawmakers sifted through the additional trove of Secret Service records. Ornato and Engel, through a Secret Service spokesman, declined to comment.

How the committee got the documents

The vast trove of records turned over to the Jan. 6 committee is the result of an ironic twist of events, according to the people briefed on the documents. The same Secret Service that permanently deleted agents’ texts from Jan. 6 and the surrounding days amid congressional requests last year has now provided to the committee this large volume of internal communications from the same time period. Voluntarily, the agency has turned over every record it kept of logistical planning, security concerns, and private discussions related to the scheduled protests and president’s movements.

This extensive sharing of records — more than 1 million pages’ worth and many which the committee did not specifically request — followed a period when the Secret Service came under fire for executing an agencywide destruction of all texts exchanged from agents phones in that key period. Federal regulations mandate the preservation of government records, and the Secret Service’s deletion of these records prompted a federal investigation into the failure to do so. The texts were wiped from agents’ phones as part of a Secret Service-wide update of employees phones that began in January 2021. Secret Service officials have said the mass deletion of reams of potential evidence was unintentional, and the agency’s telephone provider has concluded those texts are now impossible to recover.

Secret Service cannot recover Jan. 6-related texts

The committee had considered sharing a portion of its videotaped interview with Ornato at a previous hearing and it’s unclear if lawmakers will do so Thursday. In one portion of his interview, according to two people briefed on his account, Ornato described briefing White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows the afternoon of Jan. 6 about detailed reports of violence breaking out at the Capitol, as well as police officers being transported to a hospital. The committee learned from other witnesses that Meadows then briefed Trump.

The hearing could build out the evidence that Trump took steps to ratchet up the conflict at the Capitol, despite being warned of escalating violence. Lawmakers on the committee have grown particularly suspicious about the agency’s transparency with congressional investigators as they’ve struggled to obtain some information they requested over a year ago.

The committee’s hearing Thursday, probably its final one before the release of its report, will also illuminate how associates of Trump — including chief strategist Stephen K. Bannon and Roger Stone, a longtime friend and onetime adviser — planned on declaring victory regardless of the outcome of the 2020 presidential election, The Post previously reported. The House select committee intends to show video footage of Stone recorded by Danish filmmakers during the weeks before the Jan. 6 violence.

Another portion of this week’s hearing is expected to focus on the continuing threat of domestic extremism and political violence spawned by efforts to overturn the 2020 election, according to a person familiar with the matter.

The committee has continued interviewing witnesses in the lead-up to the final hearing, and it interviewed Virginia “Ginni” Thomas, the conservative activist and wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, last month. It’s unclear whether the committee will use any of Thomas’s interview, which was only transcribed and not videotaped or recorded, Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.) said recently in an interview on MSNBC.

Read original article here

Sen. Ron Johnson downplays Jan. 6 as ‘not what an armed insurrection would look like’

Sen. Ron Johnson on Tuesday again downplayed the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection, in which a pro-Trump mob stormed the U.S. Capitol seeking to stop the certification of Joe Biden’s electoral win.

In remarks to the Milwaukee Rotary Club on Tuesday morning, the Wisconsin Republican argued that it was inaccurate to call the attack an “armed insurrection,” because there were no firearms seized from the Capitol that day, despite plenty of evidence of firearms in the crowd.

“The ‘armed insurrectionists’ stayed within the rope lines in the Rotunda,” Johnson added, making air-quote gestures with his fingers. “I’m sorry — that’s not what an armed insurrection would look like. I don’t think they’d be able to reopen Congress about six hours later and complete the counting of electoral votes if there literally had been an ‘armed insurrection.’ So again, I realize that term has been used to inflame the situation.”

Johnson did not mention that many rioters went beyond the rope lines, ransacking congressional offices, damaging sculptures and art, and causing about $1.5 million worth of damage. At the insistence of top lawmakers, Congress reconvened about six hours after the attack, despite there still being shattered glass, broken furniture and what a spokesperson for the Committee on House Administration called “corrosive gas agent residue.” Rep. Andy Kim (D-N.J.) said there was “garbage and debris everywhere.”

The attack on the Capitol also left five people dead, including a police officer and a woman shot by police. Two other officers who were on duty that day later died by suicide.

Johnson’s comments Tuesday were swiftly condemned by several Democratic lawmakers and at least one member of the Biden administration.

“Ron Johnson continues to downplay the violence of Jan 6, glossing over how the mob seriously wounded police officers,” tweeted Rep. Gwen Moore (D-Wis.). “January 6 was a deadly attempt to overturn the election. To call it anything else is a disservice to the brave men & women who protected our democracy that day.”

“It WAS an armed insurrection,” tweeted former Republican congressman Joe Walsh, who has since left the GOP. “@RonJohnsonWI is wrong. And in November, the people of Wisconsin should tell him he’s wrong.”

Wisconsin Lt. Gov. Mandela Barnes (D), who is running for Senate against Johnson, tweeted that his opponent is “still covering for the Jan. 6 insurrectionists.”

“This is NOT who we are or what we stand for in Wisconsin,” Barnes tweeted. “It’s time to vote him out.”

Johnson also said Tuesday that “protesters did teach us all how you can use flagpoles, that kind of stuff, as weapons.” In video of the Jan. 6 attack, law enforcement officers outside the Capitol were shown being harassed, beaten and sprayed with gas substances by members of the mob. One of the Capitol Police officers who responded that day, Caroline Edwards, said she was struck in the head with a bike rack. She later described the scene as “carnage,” recalling how officers were on the ground, bleeding and throwing up. In one video from the attack, a rioter can be seen bashing a fallen police officer with a pole flying the American flag.

Early on Jan. 6, The Post’s Kate Woodsome saw signs of violence hours before thousands of President Trump’s loyalists besieged the Capitol. (Video: Joy Yi, Kate Woodsome/The Washington Post, Photo: John Minchillo/AP/The Washington Post)

“You mean the January 6th attackers ‘did teach us how you can use a flag pole’ to brutally beat police officers, @SenRonJohnson?” deputy White House press secretary Andrew Bates tweeted Tuesday in response to Johnson’s remarks.

In a statement, Johnson’s office claimed that the senator had said “summer protesters,” not “some of the protesters,” and that he had been referring to people protesting the killing of George Floyd in the summer of 2020.

“This clip is completely and deceptively taken out of context to push a political narrative,” Johnson spokeswoman Alexa Henning said in an email. “He acknowledges the left-wing rioters know how to use flagpoles and other metal objects and water bottles as weapons. But there is a distinction between that and an armed insurrection.”

Johnson was “in no way condoning this action,” Henning added.

This is not the first time Johnson has downplayed the severity of the Jan. 6 attack. Several Democrats last year called on Johnson to step down after he said on a conservative radio show that the Capitol rioters hadn’t scared him — but that they might have had they been Black Lives Matter protesters. On Tuesday, Johnson reiterated part of those sentiments.

“I did say I was never afraid on Jan. 6 because it’s true,” Johnson said. “I was in the Senate chamber. They closed the doors. My assumption was that a couple of crazy people got by security. … About five, 10 minutes later they opened up the door and said go back to your office. And I went back to my office and then I saw the violence.”

During the Oath Keepers’ sedition trial on Oct. 3, a U.S. prosecutor told the jury the extremist members planned “to shatter a bedrock of American democracy.” (Video: Reuters)

Johnson’s comments came as a trial began this week for several members of the extremist Oath Keepers group who allegedly traveled to Washington and staged firearms near the Capitol before forcing entry through the Capitol Rotunda doors in combat and tactical gear in the Jan. 6 attack. Oath Keepers leader Stewart Rhodes and four co-defendants face seditious conspiracy and other charges; they have pleaded not guilty to felony charges alleging that they conspired for weeks after the 2020 presidential election to unleash political violence to oppose the lawful transfer of power to Biden.

Spencer S. Hsu, Tom Jackman and Rachel Weiner contributed to this report.



Read original article here

Oath Keepers trial: Rhodes attacked ‘bedrock of democracy’ on Jan. 6, prosecutors say

Members of the extremist group Oath Keepers led by Stewart Rhodes planned for an armed rebellion “to shatter a bedrock of American democracy” — the peaceful transfer of presidential power — culminating in their role in the attack on the U.S. Capitol, a prosecutor told a jury Monday in the first seditious conspiracy trial of the sprawling Jan. 6 investigation.

Rhodes and four co-defendants that day staged an “arsenal” of firearms in nearby Virginia and several forcibly breached the Capitol with a mob to prevent Congress from confirming President Biden’s 2020 election victory, thwarting the will of U.S. voters and elected representatives, Assistant U.S. Attorney Jeffrey Nestler said during opening statements in federal court.

“That was their goal — to stop by whatever means necessary the lawful transfer of presidential power, including by taking up arms against the United States government,” Nestler said. Descending on Washington “to attack not just the Capitol, not just Congress, not just our government — but our country itself.”

During the Oath Keepers’ sedition trial on Oct. 3, a U.S. prosecutor told the jury the extremist members planned “to shatter a bedrock of American democracy.” (Video: Reuters)

Rhodes’s defense decried the prosecution as “government mischaracterization and government overreach.” Oath Keepers came to Washington as “peacekeeping” security guards who “had no part in the bulk of the violence that occurred on January 6th,” attorney Phillip Linder said, believing that President Donald Trump could invoke the Insurrection Act to mobilize private militias, put down riots and remain in power.

“That is why he did what he did,” Linder said, adding that Rhodes would testify in his own defense. “You’re going to hear from Stewart Rhodes himself about who he is, about the Oath Keepers, what their role is and what their role was on January 6th.”

The clashing views of democracy, patriotism and violence at the seat of the U.S. government during the handoff from Trump to Biden played out in the most-anticipated trial to arise from the Jan. 6. 2021, Capitol siege. Held at a federal courthouse blocks from the Capitol where events unfolded 21 months ago, the trial of Rhodes — a former Army paratrooper and Yale Law graduate who has become one of the most visible figures of the far-right anti-government movement — poses a major legal and political test of the Biden administration’s pledge to combat domestic terrorism, as well as the law and the courts.

Prosecutors in court and lawmakers in a parallel House investigation describe the Oath Keepers as an anti-government group that played an outsize role in organizing individuals to come to the Capitol prepared for violence. The group’s leaders worked with Trump post-election “Stop the Steal” advisers who spent weeks making unfounded allegations of election fraud, including former national security aide Michael Flynn and longtime political confidant Roger Stone.

On the day networks declared the election for Biden, Nov. 7, Rhodes shared a text with Stone and others asking, “What’s the plan?” the prosecution’s first witness, an FBI agent, testified. Rhodes then shared an action plan from an anti-government uprising in Serbia that included storming its parliament.

Four days after Jan. 6, Nestler told jurors, Rhodes urged an intermediary to tell Trump, “It’s still not too late too take action.” But the person secretly recorded Rhodes. “My only regret is that they should have brought rifles” into the city, Rhodes said in audio Nestler played to jurors.

Nine of at least 33 alleged Oath Keepers members or associates arrested on charges related to the Jan. 6 riot have pleaded guilty, including seven to conspiracy charges, and several of them are expected to testify for the government against Rhodes.

Rhodes and 10 others were indicted in January on three related conspiracy charges, plotting to oppose by force federal authority and laws related to Biden’s swearing-in; to obstruct an official proceeding of Congress; and to impede lawmakers from discharging their duties. The first two charges are punishable by up to 20 years in prison. Nine remaining defendants face trial this week and in early November on those charges and others alleging destruction of federal property, destruction of evidence, and impeding police in a riot.

Four others are on trial with Rhodes, including three who have served in the military. Kelly Meggs, 53, is an auto dealer from Dunnellon, Fla. Kenneth Harrelson, 42, of Titusville, Fla., and Ohio militia leader and bar owner Jessica Watkins, 39, of Woodstock are Army veterans. Thomas Caldwell, 68, of, Berryville, Va., is a retired Navy intelligence officer.

In a 75-minute opening statement, prosecutors recapped a 48-page, 17-count indictment and alleged dramatic new details.

What you need to know about the Oath Keepers trial

Nestler told jurors that on Jan. 6 just as 14 Oath Keepers co-conspirators allegedly pushed past police and through the Capitol’s East Rotunda doors after marching up the steps in military-style formation and gear, Rhodes stood back “like a general overseeing the battlefield” and did not enter the building. The prosecutor said Rhodes was recorded on video saying of lawmakers inside: “They need to be sh—–g their pants. Sic semper tyrannis!”

“Thus always to tyrants,” Nestler translated from the Latin after playing the video for jurors.

“It’s what John Wilkes Booth yelled when he assassinated President Lincoln,” Nestler said.

Nestler gave the jury of nine men and seven women a panoramic view of actions spanning from the Nov. 3, 2020, election, through the Capitol attack and up to the first co-defendants’ arrests on Jan. 17, 2021.

While Rhodes named his group for the oath sworn by members of the U.S. military “to defend the Constitution against all enemies,” Nestler argued that the philosophy “perverts the constitutional order.”

“He preaches to his followers that they should disobey orders that he says are unconstitutional,” Nestler said.

The prosecutor said Rhodes’s orders unfolded beginning Nov. 4 and that he told an invitation-only message group of Oath Keepers leaders to ignore the election results: “We aren’t getting through this without a civil war. Too late for that. Prepare your mind, body, spirit,” On Nov. 10, after contacting Stone and Oath Keepers leaders, he published openly to Oath Keepers a “step-by-step” call to action modeled after the Serbian plot that included storming parliament after filling the streets and seeking support from the police and military.

Released videos show Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio meeting Oath Keepers leader Stewart Rhodes the day before the attack on the Capitol. (Video: U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia)

On Nov. 9, Rhodes laid out that they should use “code or shorthand” when describing their plan to stop the transfer of power through violence if necessary, by linking it to Trump’s use of the Insurrection Act, “magic words” that gave them “plausible deniability” for any actions to follow, Nestler alleged. Another “alarmed follower” recorded Rhodes saying on a Nov. 9 conference call that mentioning the law would give the group “legal cover” for bringing firearms as part of “quick reaction force” teams to Washington for use as needed.

In open letters in December 2020, Rhodes elaborated by calling on Trump to invoke the Insurrection Act, saying that “millions” of American gun owners stood ready to answer his “call to arms.” Rhodes said that on Jan. 6, if Congress defied his false claims of a stolen election, “tens of thousands of patriotic Americans … will already be in Washington D.C., and many of us will have our mission-critical gear stowed nearby just outside D.C., and we will answer the call right then and there.”

As officials including Trump’s own attorney general, William P. Barr, and White House attorneys said there was no evidence of anything that would cast doubt on Biden’s win, Rhodes wrote on Christmas Day, “The only chance we/he has is if we scare the s— out of them [Congress] and convince them it will be torches and pitchforks time,” Nestler said.

Rhodes purchased tens of thousands of dollars worth of firearms and related gear in the days before and after Jan. 6, and seven co-conspirators including co-defendants Meggs, Harrelson and Caldwell were seen stashing firearms cases and bags at a Comfort Inn in the Ballston neighborhood of Arlington, across the Potomac, where “heavy” QRF teams from Florida, Arizona and North Carolina had rooms, Nestler said.

Meggs and Caldwell allegedly laid plans to transport firearms by boat if bridges to Washington were closed, Nestler said. Meggs and Harrelson and others engaged in firearms and “unconventional warfare” training in Florida, including from a man who Meggs allegedly told a cooperating witness drove to Washington with hand grenades inside his recreational vehicle that the FBI later recovered.

On Jan. 6, Meggs searched for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.,) inside the Capitol, while Watkins allegedly impeded police guarding an entrance to the Senate chamber, Nestler said.

“We are in the main dome right now. We are rocking it. They are throwing grenades, they are fricking shooting people with paint balls. But we are in here,” Watkins shouted over a push-to-talk radio-phone app, according to a recording played by Nestler.

“Get it, Jess,” an Illinois Oath Keepers leader not at the Capitol responded, “This is … everything we f—ing trained for!” Nestler said.

In defense, Linder said government and media accounts were wrong, that the prosecution revealed little new that wasn’t laid out in charging papers, and promised “surprises” when the defense’s turn to present evidence came.

Linder said the defendants face “substantial prison sentences” and have been portrayed as “a paramilitary group, a racist group, a violent group.” His statements drew a warning from U.S. District Judge Amit P. Mehta, who said the latter assertions are not alleged by the government and that sentencing penalties are withheld from jurors so they do not form judgments about defendants’ guilt.

Linder suggested government cooperators lied in pursuit of leniency. He singled out Oath Keepers member William Todd Wilson, who said in his seditious conspiracy guilty plea that he heard Rhodes “repeatedly implore” someone on the night of Jan. 6 to tell Trump to call on the Oath Keepers.

“That call doesn’t exist,” Linder told jurors in a 22-minute opening statement, “You will get a different picture of this case than what the government has sold you here in openings.”

Linder said the Quick Reaction Forces were “reactive and defensive only,” for use “if Trump called them in.”

Caldwell attorney David W. Fischer Sr., blasted the FBI for what he called incompetence and overreach in its pursuit of his client, saying it initially described him as a “mastermind” of the attack, believed wrongly that he entered the building, misidentified his age and eye color, and did not know he formerly worked for the FBI.

“It’s an absolute outrage,” Fischer said. “I’m begging you to clear his name.”

Watkins’s attorney Jonathan W. Crisp said his client was a former firefighter and “protest junkie” who joined the Oath Keepers in 2019 out of a compulsion to protect people as a medic at demonstrations such as those in Louisville following the police killing of Breonna Taylor. Crisp said Watkins had no role in planning for any attack on the Capitol, did not meet or speak with Rhodes before Jan. 6, and undertook other actions such as recruiting and training members well before Trump announced a Jan. 6 rally.

Who are the Oath Keepers going to trial on seditious conspiracy charges?

“You will learn her desire to serve and protect ultimately is what took her to D.C. this day,” Crisp said. “What you will also learn is that Jessica is a transgender woman, and that has impacted who she is and her relationship with the Oath Keepers around her. A lot of things she did that day was because she tried to fit in.”

Attorneys for Meggs and Harrelson deferred making opening statements until the government rests its case, expected in about four weeks.

Nestler urged jurors to weigh what the defendants said to each other about “storming the Capitol,” not what they claimed to outsiders about helping police or “anyone other than themselves.”

That is an “after-the-fact justification” by “people who held themselves up as pro-law and order, pro-military, pro-police, to craft the story that they were on the side of righteousness that day. They were not,” Nestler said.

He repeated for emphasis: “In these conspirators’ narrative, they were patriots. They were not.”

Read original article here

Takeaways from the dramatic opening statements of the Oath Keepers Jan. 6 trial



CNN
 — 

With the historic case that they had brought against Oath Keepers accused of plotting to attack the US Capitol on January 6, 2021, prosecutors framed up how the jury should think about the allegations with an hour-plus opening statement that kicked off the trial in earnest.

Five alleged members of the far-right militia, including its leader Stewart Rhodes, are on trial in Washington DC’s federal courthouse. They have pleaded not guilty to the charge of seditious conspiracy, a charge rarely brought by the Justice Department, and other charges.

The Justice Department’s opening statement featured messages and other communications among the defendants that prosecutors say show the Oath Keepers’ unlawful plotting to disrupt Congress’ certification of President Joe Biden’s electoral win. As the prosecutors sought to use the words of the defendants against them, they also played video capturing the Oath Keepers’ actions in the Capitol and displayed maps and charts to help the jury follow along. Each juror has their own screen to see evidence.

“They said out loud and in writing what they planned to do,” Jeffrey Nestler, an assistant US Attorney, told the jury. “When the opportunity finally presented itself … they sprang into action.”

A lawyer for Rhodes, the first defense attorney to deliver an opening statement told the jurors that they will see evidence that will show that the defendants “had no part in the bulk” of the violence that occurred on January 6.

“You may not like what you see and hear our defendants did,” attorney Phillip Linder said, “but the evidence will show that they didn’t do anything illegal that day.”

Here are takeaways from Monday’s trial so far:

The Justice Department began its opening statement with the accusation that the defendants sought to “stop by any means necessary” the lawful transfer of presidential power, “including taking up arms against the United States government.”

Nestler started with a reference to the “core democratic custom of the routine” transfer of power, which Nestler said stretched back to the time of George Washington.

“These defendants tried to change that history. They concocted a plan for armed rebellion to shatter a bedrock of American democracy,” Nestler said.

The defendants got their opportunity two weeks before the Inauguration, Nestler said.

“If Congress could not meet it could not declare the winner of the election. and that was their goal – to stop by any means necessary the lawful transfer of power, including taking up arms against the United States government,” he said.

He said the defendants descended on DC to attack “not just the Capitol, not just our government, not just DC, but our country itself.”

During the Justice Department’s opening, the jury was presented with video footage, maps and other audio-visual tools that prosecutors used to give an overview of their case.

Nestler’s presentation included iPhone footage from the attack that the prosecutor used to identify the defendants and other alleged co-conspirators. When video showing defendant Kelly Meggs was presented, Nestler noted the patch he wore, which said, according to Nestler: “I don’t believe in anything, I’m just here for the violence.”

As the video clips played, the jury also saw a map of the Capitol that Nestler used to situate the action that was recorded by video. Nestler also had a physical chart, perched on an easel in the courtroom, listing out the alleged co-conspirators.

Jurors were also presented with the messages that the defendants allegedly sent in the weeks after the election, including their calls for a violent response to former President Donald Trump’s loss.

“Its easy to chat here. The real question is who’s willing to DIE” Meggs wrote in one message shown by prosecutors.

The DOJ also showed video and photographs of the Oath Keepers participating in tactical training sessions. A map of the Washington Mall – showing the site of the rally that preceded the Capitol attack and its distance from the Capitol – was presented while Nestler ticked through communications, including on the walkie talk app Zello, between the defendants that allegedly occurred that day.

Nestler used the opening arguments to also preview how the Justice Department will respond to defenses the Oath Keepers’ attorneys are expected to put forward.

“There is evidence that you will hear that they had more than one reason to be here in DC, in addition to attacking Congress,” the prosecutor said. The defendants may have been planning to attend the rally near the White House earlier in the day, Nestler noted, but so did thousands of others. Nestler also referenced to potential attempts by the defense to argue the Oath Keepers were preparing to come to DC to serve as security, noting that the defendants weren’t licensed, trained or paid for their security work.

“Even being bad security guards isn’t itself illegal.” Nestler said. However, according to the prosecutor, the goal they were actually preparing for was “unlawful.”

Additionally, Nestler alluded to the belief that Trump was going to invoke the Insurrection Act; the defense has signaled it plans to argue that the Oath Keepers were preparing to respond to such an invocation.

“President Trump did not invoke the Insurrection Act,” Nestler said. “These defendants needed to take matters into their own hands. They needed to activate the plan they had agreed on.”

The Justice Department also emphasized the backgrounds of some of the defendants and how that fit into the department’s theory of the case. Rhodes, as Nestler repeatedly noted, is a graduate of Yale Law school. He knew to be careful with his words and told his co-conspirators to be careful with theirs, Nestler said.

Thomas Caldwell, another defendant, served in the military, Nestler said. “Based on that water experience, he planned to use boats to get across the Potomac.”

The Justice Department detailed the preparations the Oath Keepers allegedly undertook before January 6 as well as what they’re accusing the defendants of doing during the Capitol breach.

In December 2020, Rhodes told others that January 6 presented a “hard constitutional deadline,” according to prosecutors, and that they would need to “do it ourselves” if Trump didn’t stop the certification of the election.

“With time, as their options dwindled and it became more and more likely that power would be transferred,” Nestler said Monday, “these defendants became more and more desperate and more and more focused on that date that Rhodes referred to as a constitutional deadline.”

According to Nestler, the group organized a caravan of Florida members to drive up to Washington for January 6, and made preparations for where the organization could store firearms in Virginia, just outside DC. Some members of the group, according to prosecutors, brought weapons into DC that day, including chemical spray, thick pieces of wood, dressed in paramilitary gear.

Nestler’s opening described the “stack” formations the defendants allegedly used to enter the Capitol. He played a video of defendant Jessica Watkins, who allegedly led the first group, pushing against a crowd outside the House chamber shouting “push, push, push! Get in there, they can’t hold us.”

The second group positioned themselves outside of a suite of offices belonging to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Nestler said. Nestler said that Meggs had a “keen interest in Speaker Pelosi,” and later told associates that “we looked for her.”

At first, the defendants saw the breach as a success, Nestler said, describing them as “elated,” “boastful” and “proud.” But, according to DOJ’s account, the defendants quickly realized they were in legal jeopardy, and instructed one another to flee town, delete messages and keep quiet.

“Let me put it in infantry speak: SHUT THE F**K UP,” Rhodes said in one Signal message, as presented by prosecutors.

Even with their criminal exposure, Nestler said, Rhodes continued to plot. On January 10, Rhodes met with someone in Texas to try and get a message to former President Trump. The meeting, which had not previously been reported, was secretly recorded by an attendee.

“My only regret is that they should have brought rifles… we could have fixed it right then and there.” Rhodes said of January 6, according to the Justice Department’s opening.

Rhodes attorney Linder told the jurors that they will see evidence that will show that defendants “had no part in the bulk” of the violence that occurred on January 6.

He suggested that there will be gaps in the evidence, such as video, that the Justice Department will show the jury. He said that, once the prosecutors put on their case, the defense will fill in those gaps.

“You may not like what you see and hear our defendants did, but the evidence will show that they didn’t do anything illegal that day,” Linder said.

As the defense attorney delivered his opening, he was told by the judge to avoid topics that had been deemed out of bounds for the trial – with at one point, Judge Amit Mehta bringing him up to the bench for a private discussion.

Among the off-limits topics brought up by Linder that prompted the interventions were comments about the amount prison time the charges bring, the congressional narrative around January 6, remarks about defendants sitting in jail, and certain details about the Insurrection Act.

Mehta told Linder to keep his opening within the parameters of the relevant subject matter that has been established before the trial.

Linder went on to preview other aspects of the Oath Keepers’ defense.

“The real evidence is going to show you that our clients were there to do security for events for the 5th and the 6th,” Linder said, while calling his client a “extremely patriotic” and a “constitutional expert.”

“Stewart Rhodes meant no harm to the Capitol that day,” Linder said, as he described some of the rhetoric among the defendants “free speech and bravado.”

He said that the evidence will show that there was no plan like the one that the government is alleging.

Early into Monday’s proceedings, Mehta went to great lengths to emphasize that the jury had “no preconceived” prejudices towards the Oath Keepers and the defendants specifically.

He did so while explaining why he was denying a request from the defendants that the case be transferred to Virginia. Mehta ticked through statistics from the jury selection process that shed light on how the jurors had responded to questions meant to test their impartiality.

None of them reported having strong feelings against January 6 that would affect their ability to be fair. While about half of the jurors said they had heard of the Oath Keepers before, none of them reported having strong feelings about Oath Keepers that would threaten the jurors’ impartiality, nor had any of the jurors heard of the specific defendants, according to Mehta’s account of their answers on the jury questionnaire.

“What that means is voir dire has done its job,” Mehta said, referring to the jury selection process.

This story has been updated with additional details.

Read original article here

The Ultimate News Site