Teri Kanefield Profile picture
Mar 3, 2022 15 tweets 7 min read Read on X
Yup. And here's the statement of the offense:
storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…

Joshua James pleaded guilty.

The facts include "agreeing to take part in a plan developed by Rhodes to stop the lawful transfer of presidential power by January 20, 2021" by force.

By force.

1/
James is naming names. (Screenshot #1)

At the end of a 🔥 statement of the offense, the prosecutors let us know that the details included do not constitute a "complete statement of all facts known by Joshua James or the government."(#2)

They're not telling all they know.

2/
The easiest way to get convictions is to get people to plead guilty. Duh, right?

The DOJ now has a conviction for seditious conspiracy and conspiracy to prevent the transfer of power by force.

The easiest way to collect evidence is to get it directly from co-conspirators.

3/
Trials are unpredictable. It's so much easier when the person just says, "Yeah, I did it."

And it's always hard to get all the evidence, particularly because defendants don't have to talk.

Here's what Merrick Garland said on Jan. 5⤵️(his speech frustrated a lot of people).

4/
law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18…

Here are the elements of seditious conspiracy:
🔹Two or more persons . . .
🔹Conspire to overthrow . . . or destroy by force the Government of the US or to levy war against them . . .
🔹by force . . .

5/
. . . or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof.

The key to this crime is the use of force.

6/
Treason is almost impossible to charge. It’s defined in the Constitution as⤵️

SCOTUS has said that the “enemy” must be a country in which we are at open war, meaning a war declared by Congress.

So seditious conspiracy is the closest we have to a charge of treason.

7/
It is still going to take time.

Now the prosecutors follow all the evidence they get from James (who has to turn over everything he knows.)

The next ring will be confronted with evidence and a witness statement. They'll have to make their decision.

8/
Back to the facts.

Lots of talk during the weeks before Jan. 6 about how
"It will be a bloody and desperate fight. We are going to have a fight. That can’t be avoided."

And a shopping trip:

9/
Part of the plan involved being prepared to report to the White House and use force if anyone tried to remove Trump from the White House.

Odd.

Did they think Trump's term ends when Congress certifies the election results?🤷‍♀️

10/
The facts allege that Rhodes came up with the plan (and he has a Yale law degree, so you'd think he read the Constitution.)

Rhodes was also indicted and is awaiting trial.

Now he finds out his buddy pleaded guilty and is turning over evidence.

11/
washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2022/…
This was only the beginning. In the evening on Jan. 6, they planned to stop an inauguration (#1)

Then, on Jan. 8th, they're all like OMG we better start deleting our messages !!! (#2)

By Jan, 20, they were getting scared (#3)

12/
Reading the messages they sent each other is stunning.

They really thought they were going to overthrow the government of the United States.

They thought they would capture the Capitol and take on the "National Guard or other government actors."

13/
I suppose it's possible for these guys to be so delusional that they thought they could buy a bunch of guns and overthrow the US government (even if they did think the federal government consisted of a "cabal of elites).

Or they thought they had higher-up inside help.

14/
An FBI agent previously told the court that James chauffered Roger Stones in a golf cart on Jan. 5, the day before the insurrection.

I wish I knew what James told investigators about Roger Stone.

cnn.com/2022/03/02/pol…

15/

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Teri Kanefield

Teri Kanefield Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @Teri_Kanefield

Apr 29
Everyone will have a different opinion of the strength of the Manhattan criminal case against Trump.

I am offering no opinions on the strength or who will prevail.

I am saying that people are working too hard to explain the case and figure out the legal theory.

1/
The prosecution has everyone confused because they are framing the case as "election fraud" and "election interference" so everyone is trying to connect the crimes we know about to "election fraud."

2/

terikanefield.com/wheres-the-bee…
The legal theory of the case should be clear.

This would be clear: "It is election fraud. Here is how the evidence will support a charge of election fraud." Then show how the behavior supports election fraud.

Does this mean the prosecution will lose? No.

3/
Read 10 tweets
Mar 11
Finished. (Whew)

As promised, all about Legal pundits and the Outrage Industry, with a few cherished conspiracy theories carefully debunked.

Click here to start:

For years, I was perplexed by what I saw on Twitter. . .

1/ terikanefield.com/can-democracy-…
Image
It seemed to me that the dynamics of social media were making people more authoritarian.

Then I started reading experts in political communication and it all started making sense.


2/ terikanefield.com/can-democracy-…
Image
I wrote parts 1 - 5 in November. I thought I was finished, but I wasn't.

There were still things I didn't understand.

Writers often write to understand, so I kept reading, thinking, and writing.



3/ terikanefield.com/can-democracy-…
Image
Read 5 tweets
Mar 9
Whew! I finished.



Everything I promised: How to listen (or not listen) to legal pundits.

It's also about what is dangerous about the entire industry of punditry, speculation, and cable talk shows.

1/terikanefield.com/invented-narra…

For years I was perplexed by what I was seeing on left-leaning Twitter, political blogs, and partisan reporting.

I had the feeling that, in its way, what I was seeing was comparable to Fox: Lots of bad information and even unhinged conspiracy theories.
2terikanefield.com/invented-narra…
Of course, if I suggested that, I was blasted for "both-sidesing."

Then I discovered an area of scholarship: Communications and the overlap between communications and political science.

I read these books and light bulbs went on.

3/ Image
Read 11 tweets
Mar 2
If Trump can win with everything we know about him, what make people think a finding of guilt would change that?

It makes no sense.
Also what if the jury acquits? It can happen.

I do recall the same people thought impeachment and indictment would cause Trump to crumble.
Another contradiction: when people demanded indictments RIGHT NOW (in 2021 and early 2022) the reason was, "Everyone knows he's guilty! Look at all the evidence!"

We saw the J6 committee findings.

Trump isn't saying "I didn't do it." He's saying, "I had the right to do it."

2
We all know what he did. The question is, "Do people want a president who acts like Trump?"

A lot of people do.

People show me polls that a guilty finding would change minds.

I say rubbish. Use common sense. He lost in 2020 and he lost the popular vote in 2016. . .

3/
Read 6 tweets
Feb 29
The news takes 2 minutes to convey.

"Here is what the court did." That is news.

Listening to people speculate about why the court did it and what it means is not news.

It is entertainment.

But it is a special kind of entertainment.

1/
. . . because it is designed to keep people hooked. People need to stay glued to the screen for hour after hour.

But to hook people, you need to scare them. The Facebook whistleblower testified that content that produces strong emotions like anger gets more engagement.

2/
Fox does the same thing. There is a few minutes of news, but the facts get lost as commentators and TV personalities speculate and scare their audiences.

Before you yell at me for comparing MSNBC to FOX, read all of this:

3/terikanefield.com/can-democracy-…
Read 5 tweets
Feb 29
If I write another blog post addressing the outrage cycle here on Twitter and in the MSNBC ecosystem, it will be to explore why so many people who believe they are liberal or progressive actually want a police state.

1/
Today alone, a handful of people who consider themselves liberal or progressive told me that the "traitors need to be arrested and prosecuted."

In 2019, back when I wore myself out tamping down misinformation, I explained the legal meaning of treason.

2/
Back then, I now realize, people asked politely: "Can Trump be prosecuted for treason (over the Russia election stuff).

I explained that wouldn't happen.

Now it's different. It's more like fascist chants.

3/
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(