Good morning from a very cold Washington, DC. Today, the Oath Keepers seditious conspiracy trial will feature closing arguments for the last remaining defendants. I will live tweet for @dailykos once proceedings officially get underway (between 9-9:30AM ET). Join me! 
https://twitter.com/Brandi_Buchman/status/1594643798302535681
The final jury instructions for the Oath Keepers seditious conspiracy trial are now live.
scribd.com/document/60917…
scribd.com/document/60917…
In this trial, much has been made about Oath Keepers rhetoric. Where they have consistently argued its "locker room" talk, jurors are instructed: 1A protects the right to speech, including vile speech but 1A doesn't provide right to engage in speech integral to criminal conduct.
Jurors are also reminded: the Oath Keepers as an organization are not on trial, just the individuals.
Juror instruction on conspiracy counts:
Proof doesn't need to establish that a conspiracy began/ended on an exact date or that the conspiracy existed for a set length of time.
Proof doesn't need to establish that a conspiracy began/ended on an exact date or that the conspiracy existed for a set length of time.
A conspiracy does not have to be successful in order for jurors to find defendants guilty...
The government does not need to show that a defendant was fully informed on all of the details in a conspiracy to infer knowledge on part of defendant. And it is unnecessary for defendants to know each other to conspire...
Per jury instruction: "Some conspirators may play major roles, while others play only minor roles in the scheme. An equal role is not what the law requires, and a defendant does not need to perform any specific act beyond joining the conspiratorial agreement."
A caveat to above tweets: per jury instruction, a person's "mere association w/amember of the conspiracy does not make that person a member of the conspiracy, even then that assoc. is coupled with knowledge that a conspiracy is taking place
Sedition = opposing authority of US govt + preventing or delaying execution of US laws by force.
The govt is not required to prove both goals of the conspiracy, just one beyond a reasonable doubt. If govt hasn't proved that, verdict must be not guilty.
Note highlighted segment
The govt is not required to prove both goals of the conspiracy, just one beyond a reasonable doubt. If govt hasn't proved that, verdict must be not guilty.
Note highlighted segment
The jurors are now seated. Judge Mehta says he is hopeful that today will be the final day for closing arguments.
We will begin first with closing arguments for defendant Kenneth Harrelson by attorney Brad Geyer.
We will begin first with closing arguments for defendant Kenneth Harrelson by attorney Brad Geyer.
The charges against Oath Keeper Ken Harrelson and the evidence provided by the government are in conflict, Geyer says.
"Was this an outright indifference to the truth?"
Geyer: The doors were opened before OKers ever arrived. Doors were broken before defendants arrived.
"Was this an outright indifference to the truth?"
Geyer: The doors were opened before OKers ever arrived. Doors were broken before defendants arrived.
Geyer: Doesn't that make you hesitate? Doors open from the inside, doors no Oath Keeper ever touched or pulled upon or pushed open.
These are smaller fallacies and accusations of crimes.. that should make you hesitate...
These are smaller fallacies and accusations of crimes.. that should make you hesitate...
Geyer says there is no evidence that Ken Harrelson wanted to or tried to kill someone, bringing up video shown at trial where prosecutors say OKers were engaged in military/weapons training; Geyer says this was 2 mos. elec, mos. before J6
Geyer calls DOJ case an "absurd insinuation of crimes not committed;" Geyer also says he was sitting in the back of the court on a cot with a "blanky and stuffed animal" last week when he heard his client's name come up repeatedly during close in false ways
Geyer says DOJ falsely accused Harrelson in its closing of deleting his Signal app. It's not in evidence, Geyer said. His messages in OK Signal chats couldn't be found because he never said what govt accuses him of.
https://twitter.com/Brandi_Buchman/status/1593635905851514883?s=20&t=ovPjT7VnuVpUcZy8mSvocw
Further context re: why got says Harrelson comms are missing
https://twitter.com/Brandi_Buchman/status/1584972661893238784?s=20&t=ovPjT7VnuVpUcZy8mSvocw
Geyer also goes in hard on govt witness Abdullah Rasheed who was convicted of sexual assault of a minor. Rasheed blew whistle on OKers Nov. 9 GoTo Mtg; Geyer says he doused himself in sanitizer, showered after Rasheed's testimony
Geyer argues its abusrd to trust Rasheed's testimony over the no guilty plea of Harrelson, who is a veteran.
Kenny wouldn't know what an insurrection act was if it bit him in the ass, Geyer says. "When we first got involved in this case, none of us knew what it was either. "
Kenny, "a hard-working veteran," had no concept of what he had or hadn't heard from a yale law school graduate or from his counsel about the Insurrection Act, Geyer said
Technical difficulties on my side with my computer. One moment.
I have to break from live tweeting to get a new cord for my laptop since it has apparently decided to break this morning without warning.
Cord replaced. Back in court soon. Apologies all
I am back in court and just in time. Jurors are reentering the courtroom after a short break.
I'm catching up on what happened while I was out: Defendant Ken Harrelson's closing arguments wrapped; his atty Brad Geyer pushed jurors to acquit saying OKers did not intend to impede officers and were unaware of violence against officers at Cap
https://twitter.com/rparloff/status/1594718253498368000?s=20&t=K0CQ0nmZ62WC5gBCIO-0Iw
A trial is about credibility; in this trial it is about the credibility of the government and what they have presented, defense atty for OKer Jessica Watkins says as he begins his closing remarks today.
Jonathan Crisp: A government is typically tasked with prosecuting cases in a manner consistent with justice; and what defense has presented and what we'll show you here is a manipulation of evidence and they have lost any right to any credibility you would want to give them
Crisp: The defense wants you to be as fair and impartial without giving the govt the benefit of the doubt at any point.
It is hugely important to understand how this timeline came about and how govt manufactured many of the things you have seen
It is hugely important to understand how this timeline came about and how govt manufactured many of the things you have seen
The government twisted a timeline interspersed with texts, Crisp says.
(He is walking back and forth past the mic as he delivers his closing remarks, so the audio feed down to the media room is a bit wonky)
(He is walking back and forth past the mic as he delivers his closing remarks, so the audio feed down to the media room is a bit wonky)
Crisp for defendant Jessica Watkins: She recognized what she did in that hallway was wrong....inaudible... and quite frankly...inaudible... you never heard a contradiction in saying it was wrong (her conduct)
Crisp says Watkins made multiple proffers to the FBI and not once, Crisp argues, did the government come back to her and say, didn't you tell the FBI of a plan to stop certification?
Crisp argues the only pt DOJ could make was that she didn't do this
Crisp argues the only pt DOJ could make was that she didn't do this
What did you hear her say when her phone was in her pocket? What was the chances she actually heard what individual is saying to her on Zello ...
If this is about some plan, the plan didn't happen with them, Crisp says
Context:
If this is about some plan, the plan didn't happen with them, Crisp says
Context:
https://twitter.com/Brandi_Buchman/status/1593255631217373184?s=20&t=K0CQ0nmZ62WC5gBCIO-0Iw
Crisp questioning credibility of govt evidence/interviews in particular w/fiancee Montana Siniff. Crisp says DOJ said Siniff told him she went into Cap on 1/6 to look at paintings.
Siniff, Crisp said, didn't remember it this way.
Siniff, Crisp said, didn't remember it this way.
The question posted to Siniff was: what was her activities IN the capitol, not her intent. He argues, in short, govt was trying to manipulate the information from Siniff's FBI interview to fit their narrative about Watkins allegations
Govt manipulated, deceived jurors during questioning of witnesses, Crisp says.
There was never any training of OKers in advance of 1/6; the remark about getting "fighting fit" was based on Watkins paranoia about incoming admin, not about overthrowing it
There was never any training of OKers in advance of 1/6; the remark about getting "fighting fit" was based on Watkins paranoia about incoming admin, not about overthrowing it
https://twitter.com/Brandi_Buchman/status/1577037054026084352?s=20&t=K0CQ0nmZ62WC5gBCIO-0Iw
Crisp says when Watkins said she had a death wish on witness stand, it shouldn't be interpreted beyond: she wanted her life to have meaning
https://twitter.com/Brandi_Buchman/status/1592944736985567232?s=20&t=K0CQ0nmZ62WC5gBCIO-0Iw
On 1/4 Watkins sent text: where to we drop off weapons; Harrelson says next day, do we have QRF address yet? Meggs replies DM.
Crisp: What did DOJ do with Watkins? They omitted Harrelson's text before Meggs "DM" and suggested Meggs told her to DM after QRF query
Crisp: What did DOJ do with Watkins? They omitted Harrelson's text before Meggs "DM" and suggested Meggs told her to DM after QRF query
Crisp: Congress recessed at 2:21 on 1/6.
No one knew how certification worked, just enough to know it was taking place. When they heard Pence "betrayed" them, Watkins said she thought it meant certification as over, so how do you interfere w/ a process that wasn't ongoing?
No one knew how certification worked, just enough to know it was taking place. When they heard Pence "betrayed" them, Watkins said she thought it meant certification as over, so how do you interfere w/ a process that wasn't ongoing?
Everyone wants to say why are you in this building, why are you even there.... Crisp keeps stepping away from the mic...
He's saying something about a specific mental state, so assuming he's discussing intent here.
He's saying something about a specific mental state, so assuming he's discussing intent here.
Crisp: People on steps were singing God Bless America, natl'l anthem, that was the atmosphere from her perspective.
Were there things she turned blinders too? Probably, he says
Were there things she turned blinders too? Probably, he says
Crisp says he'll pause from the timeline and pulls up cell phone records, says govt manipulated this data too.
So, it sounds like the tie that binds all defense arguments together is: the government manipulated the sequencing of evidence to make their case convincing
So, it sounds like the tie that binds all defense arguments together is: the government manipulated the sequencing of evidence to make their case convincing
No credibility, none, Crisp says of DOJ evidence.
This Michael Bay production all depends on a lie, he adds. (Michael Bay must be the defense's preferred director, 2nd time he's been mentioned at this trial)
This Michael Bay production all depends on a lie, he adds. (Michael Bay must be the defense's preferred director, 2nd time he's been mentioned at this trial)
Crisp says there's an error in the Capitol rotunda video sequence and in the senate hallway video sequence (where Watkins, his client, was heard screaming push, push, push, get in there, they can't hold us)
Crisp continues to say there is a manipulation of the timeline; he keeps walking away from the mic... but when he appears back in front of it, he says William Isaacs led the way, not Watkins.
He also says DOJ point that OKers split evenly in stacks once inside Cap is not correct
He also says DOJ point that OKers split evenly in stacks once inside Cap is not correct
Govt will have a chance to address the defense's closing arguments when it makes its rebuttal case
Crisp says stack formations were about "direction not control"
He kept walking away from the mic, so presumably, he is belaboring a point often argued by defense: the stack formations were not about being able to force entry but to guide each other thru mob
He kept walking away from the mic, so presumably, he is belaboring a point often argued by defense: the stack formations were not about being able to force entry but to guide each other thru mob
Crisp shows photos of Watkins helping a man out of the Capitol; he says Watkins was there to be a medic, to help people
https://twitter.com/Brandi_Buchman/status/1592969166440439808?s=20&t=K0CQ0nmZ62WC5gBCIO-0Iw
Crisp notes that Watkins had bear spray on her but she never used it. When she was later stopped on the street with Crowl and the Parkers by police, she didn't hide anything and cooperated with questions, he says
Crisp brings up the tax issue with Watkins. DoJ alleged she didn't file in '18. Crisp says DOJ witness lied when he testified that everyone must file regardless of income
If they will go to this extreme with their narrative for their context, they are entitled to no credibility
If they will go to this extreme with their narrative for their context, they are entitled to no credibility
There's no evidence to suggest Watkins went into the Capitol to be part of a conspiracy, no evidence to suggest she went down the senate hallway for any other reason than she got "caught up," Crisp argues
Crisp says Watkins was saying "push" in the sen. hallway because she had nowhere to go and was being crushed.
For all the discussion about what the DOJ omitted - he has now omitted the full sentence she uttered in that hallway:
"Push push push, get in there, they can't hold us"
For all the discussion about what the DOJ omitted - he has now omitted the full sentence she uttered in that hallway:
"Push push push, get in there, they can't hold us"
Crisp is far from the mic as he begins talking about "beyond a reasonable doubt"
"Ms. Watkins has more credibility than anyone on the government's side... she let them into her home, into her phone, into every aspect of her life."
"Ms. Watkins has more credibility than anyone on the government's side... she let them into her home, into her phone, into every aspect of her life."
Crisp: Can you stop something that is already stopped? (re: certification) If the plan is to do that, how do you kill a dead body?
He asks the jury to acquit on all charges except for civil disorder since she admitted to that during her testimony.
He asks the jury to acquit on all charges except for civil disorder since she admitted to that during her testimony.
That is the end of closing arugments for Jessica Watkins. Now jurors are excused for lunch and we return at 1:30. The next and last closing arguments will be for Thomas Caldwell. Then gov't rebuttal. Caldwell atty expected to take 90 mins to close.
We are back and jurors are about to return but before they do, Mehta addresses a comparison made about murder that Crisp made during his close; he made reference to the concept of premeditation, that's not an issue in this case, Mehta says.
Crisp said, specific intent is I meant to do something on a specific date; i.e. waiting on a bluff at a lookout w/gun to kill someone at a certain time, that's premeditated murder...
Crisp said the aforementioned example was is specific intent vs swinging a baseball bat in a crowded space, murdering someone, that's reckless disregard, both criminal but both require different mental states
Mehta tells Crisp: you're right, those are 2 different concepts but i don't want to leave jury with impression that specific intent requires the kind of sit-down planning you've suggested.
crisp has objected saying this will cut his argument at the knees.
crisp has objected saying this will cut his argument at the knees.
Mehta will instruct jurors:
To the extent attys have referenced legal concepts different than my instructions to you, its my instructions that control. there's no element of premeditation in charges before you
To the extent attys have referenced legal concepts different than my instructions to you, its my instructions that control. there's no element of premeditation in charges before you
Jurors are seated and now David Fischer, the attorney for Thomas Caldwell is up, making his closing arguments.
"I came here to clear his name and that's exactly what I intend to do."
He's going to go count by count...
"I came here to clear his name and that's exactly what I intend to do."
He's going to go count by count...
Fischer starts with evidence tampering: Caldwell's charged w/deleting or unsending specific items, namely, a video to Donovan Crowl that he previously sent, and for deleting photographs depicting his participation in the attack on the Capitol.
Using a PP slide, def atty Fischer claims -
- FBI had no idea what the video (above tweet) was until Feb 2022; it wasn't a video, it was a link and a link is not a record or document, it was open source; Caldwell resent the link as a text to Crowl and never deleted the text
- FBI had no idea what the video (above tweet) was until Feb 2022; it wasn't a video, it was a link and a link is not a record or document, it was open source; Caldwell resent the link as a text to Crowl and never deleted the text
There was a lengthy sidebar and when Fischer began his closing arguments again and he started to say the link is not an object and mehta cut in, I thought we just talked about this... he moves on: nothing was withheld from grand jury, no intent to withhold link from GJ
Obstruction of evidence count #2 (tampering) -
Fischer discusses the photos on Caldwell's computer and phone and says FBI mistakenly believed C'wells personal photos were tied to J6. He says Cwells never deleted photos, gave PW to FBI, sent photos to Crowl/Watkins never deleted
Fischer discusses the photos on Caldwell's computer and phone and says FBI mistakenly believed C'wells personal photos were tied to J6. He says Cwells never deleted photos, gave PW to FBI, sent photos to Crowl/Watkins never deleted
Fischer says in photos there are no Oath Keepers, no signs of violence.
Context:
Context:
https://twitter.com/Brandi_Buchman/status/1592625843645616128?s=20&t=jHwSjlpAAYXZ0eGIC-GSUA
Caldwell could have thrown his phone into the bottom of the Shenandoah River but he didn't, Fischer says.
The 180 messages Caldwell deleted from his FB largely had nothing to do with J6 and some were sent long before J6, he argues
The 180 messages Caldwell deleted from his FB largely had nothing to do with J6 and some were sent long before J6, he argues
Caldwell met with FBI for 3 hours, Fischer says proof he isn't obstructing; he then asks jury why FBI didn't follow up with Godbolds (friends of C'wells) when they lived just across the way from Caldwell's Va. farm.
He argues FBI wasn't serious
He argues FBI wasn't serious
https://twitter.com/Brandi_Buchman/status/1592181831830732800?s=20&t=jHwSjlpAAYXZ0eGIC-GSUA
Fischer loses his patience as DOJ objects during hsi closing argument and Fischer turns to Judge Mehta and says, that's fine, that's fine, when they're doing their closing arguments, I'm going to do the same to them
Caldwell couldn't have obstructed justice, Fischer argues, because he consented to a search of his property.
Fischer now addressing allegation by DOJ that Thomas Caldwell coordinated efforts to set up the quick reaction force or QRF: NC OKer Paul Stamey asked C'well to get the boat because, as Fischer points to a group of texts from Stamey, Stamey said he was working his "sources"
Got feelers out for the boat... sleep well bro, KAG is on the case. So, Caldwell is telling Stamey, relax, I'm trying to work on finding you a boat.
Mr. Caldwell could not seek out a boat until after Stamey called him, Fischer says
Mr. Caldwell could not seek out a boat until after Stamey called him, Fischer says
Fischer, reaching, brings up the Caldwell text where Caldwell said "i just thought of this: how many ppl either in the militia or not who are still supportive of our efforts to save the republic have a boat on a trailer that could handle a potomac crossing....
Caldwell cont.: "If we had someone standing on the other side..."
Fischer says "I just thought of us" comment from Caldwell in above text wasn't about him coordinating the boat. Rather, Fischer claims Cwell "just thought of" comment was about standing on other side of Potomac
Fischer says "I just thought of us" comment from Caldwell in above text wasn't about him coordinating the boat. Rather, Fischer claims Cwell "just thought of" comment was about standing on other side of Potomac
Fischer addresses Caldwell's obstruction of an official proceeding charge.
"I have one word for you: alibi," Fischer says, claims Caldwell was not at the Cap @ 2:19 on 1/6 but was at the Peace Fountain. Congress was ordered to evacuate a min later.
But
"I have one word for you: alibi," Fischer says, claims Caldwell was not at the Cap @ 2:19 on 1/6 but was at the Peace Fountain. Congress was ordered to evacuate a min later.
But
https://twitter.com/Brandi_Buchman/status/1583125663162433536?s=20&t=K0CQ0nmZ62WC5gBCIO-0Iw
Fischer brushes back Caldwell's msg "if we had guns we could have killed 100 politicians..."
He didn't see violence, his wife didn't see violence, he made this comment about what could have happened with guns after the fact
He didn't see violence, his wife didn't see violence, he made this comment about what could have happened with guns after the fact
https://twitter.com/Brandi_Buchman/status/1593625976403120133?s=20&t=K0CQ0nmZ62WC5gBCIO-0Iw
Why would you attempt to obstruct something you believe is already done? Certification started at 1, more than an hour later, it was over by the time Caldwell got on Cap grounds, Fischer argues.
Fischer says the govt has not brought 1 person in to say Caldwell was aiding or abetting obstruction of proceeding
They thought Caldwell breached the doors when they saw his messages "doors breached"
The messages were never meant to be literal, Fischer says
Fischer again says Caldwell was like Walter Mitty
The messages were never meant to be literal, Fischer says
Fischer again says Caldwell was like Walter Mitty
https://twitter.com/Brandi_Buchman/status/1587512102159368192?s=20&t=K0CQ0nmZ62WC5gBCIO-0Iw
Fischer says the government didn't know Caldwell was disabled, argues they didn't conduct a proper investigation .
After charging him, FBI Agent Michael Palian later admitted Caldwell never went into Capitol (FBI initially thought he did because of photos on his phone)
After charging him, FBI Agent Michael Palian later admitted Caldwell never went into Capitol (FBI initially thought he did because of photos on his phone)
Fischer says Caldwell was wrongly charged because of FBI's initial error re: understanding of where Cwell was on 1/6.
He argues Caldwell wasn't on Oath Keepers chats in Signal, wasn't part of the Nov 9 Go To Meeting
He argues Caldwell wasn't on Oath Keepers chats in Signal, wasn't part of the Nov 9 Go To Meeting
on the conspiracy count; Fischer points out photos Caldwell took for a "prestrike recce" (recon) before 1/6 incl. a photo of street corners, strip club and a bank where DOJ is located just behind it.
Fischer says: I think the government is grasping for straws if the prosecution is trying to suggest he was doing something against the DOJ... that's just silly.
(He cites Caldwell's waxing about architecture on witness stand to support)
(He cites Caldwell's waxing about architecture on witness stand to support)
"I don't think anybody in this room could even tell you what the Insurrection Act means," defense atty David Fischer (for Thomas Caldwell)
(Sure, Jan.)
(Sure, Jan.)
Fischer argues that Caldwell didn't conspire with anyone because he didn't know until late December that anyone would be in DC.
Fischer points to text from Donovan Crowl to Watkins when he asks whats going on in DC?
He argues this isn't much of a plan if this was the text
Fischer points to text from Donovan Crowl to Watkins when he asks whats going on in DC?
He argues this isn't much of a plan if this was the text
Fischer argues Caldwell had no contact with any Oath Keeper on Jan 6.
But he did speak with them on morning of Jan. 7, by his own account. And:
But he did speak with them on morning of Jan. 7, by his own account. And:
https://twitter.com/Brandi_Buchman/status/1592886546252066819?s=20&t=K0CQ0nmZ62WC5gBCIO-0Iw
Fischer argues that it makes no sense to have a non-Oath Keeper coordinate the QRF.
The only thing the defense ever presented to support their claim that Caldwell was not an OKer was "he never paid dues."
OKers testified at trial, not everyone pays dues to be a member
The only thing the defense ever presented to support their claim that Caldwell was not an OKer was "he never paid dues."
OKers testified at trial, not everyone pays dues to be a member
Fischer says if Caldwell wanted to "do something" at the Captiol on 1/6, why not stay in Crystal City with quicker access to Capitol than Arlington (location of QRF hotel)
Fischer says gov't deceptively going to argue now, well it wasn't a plan to attack, they (OKers) just seized an opportunity.
Fischer: "I don't think -- I respect my colleagues and government -- but I don't think they've given you a reason to have confidence in their interpretation of messages and in their claims about conspiracies."
How does Caldwell get demoted from commander in OKers to some guy who's working under the general and demoted to "some guy with the qrf"
"It was a bait and switch," Fischer says, adding,"That's exactly what it is."
"It was a bait and switch," Fischer says, adding,"That's exactly what it is."
Fischer: This man suffers in pain every day because he was serving his country in Phillippines and experienced an injury no one saw or talks about...If anyone has the right to use their 1A in private msgs to people who get the joke, I think Mr. Caldwell earned that right.
Fischer says Caldwell broke down the stand: do you know how embarrassing it is to tell everyone you wear depends. He broke down on witness stand. and what was the gov'ts reaction?
Fischer affects his voice sarcastically: "Objection."
Fischer affects his voice sarcastically: "Objection."
Fischer has ended his closing arguments for defendant Thomas Caldwell.
And that's it for the Oath Keepers - everyone has closed and presented their evidence.
We are on a 15 min break now and when we return, AUSA Jeffrey Nestler will launch the govt's rebuttal case (1HR+/-)
And that's it for the Oath Keepers - everyone has closed and presented their evidence.
We are on a 15 min break now and when we return, AUSA Jeffrey Nestler will launch the govt's rebuttal case (1HR+/-)
Ooop - Nestler says he expects rebuttal to take 1hr20 minutes. (I didn't hear the 20 minutes part. Apologies!)
Judge Amit Mehta is back on the bench.
Govt asks first for a curative objection: w/respect to what Fischer said re: link not being a record.
Rakoczy says questions of the law are for the court. The jury's job is to establish a question of fact. What is/isnt a record up to court
Govt asks first for a curative objection: w/respect to what Fischer said re: link not being a record.
Rakoczy says questions of the law are for the court. The jury's job is to establish a question of fact. What is/isnt a record up to court
Mehta says jurors will be asked to determine whether the unsending of the message constitutes an obstruction of justice, so he doesn't think a curative instruction is required here.
Jurors back in the courtroom. Assistant US Attorney Jeffrey Nestler is at the dais. The government expects to take 1-1hr 20 minutes to make its rebuttal.
"We are truly in the homestretch now," Mehta says.
Final instructions to jurors will follow, then case goes to them.
"We are truly in the homestretch now," Mehta says.
Final instructions to jurors will follow, then case goes to them.
Nestler: The evidence of these defendants' intent is overwhelming. It is right in front of your eyes, in message after msg, meeting after meeting, video after video. They said what they wanted to accomplish, agreed w/each other to do it and then all came into DC & actually did it
Nestler: They stopped the lawful transfer of presidential power. They physically drove members of congress from Capitol building and halted Congress' joint session.
For these actions, these defendants are guilty of charges in the indictment.
For these actions, these defendants are guilty of charges in the indictment.
Their messages show their intent, their actions and then finally their cover up after the act.
A defendant's statements are evidence. They are evidence that a conspiracy existed, that a defendant entered into a conspiracy, or a def. had a certain motive/intent/knowledge
A defendant's statements are evidence. They are evidence that a conspiracy existed, that a defendant entered into a conspiracy, or a def. had a certain motive/intent/knowledge
Their own statements prove the gov't's case. Starting with Rhodes. They explained how they wanted to join together and do whatever was necessary to prevent Joe Biden from becoming president in Jan 2021.
When the lawsuits failed, amid talk of Insurrection Act - these defendants grew desperate. They saw their opportunity on Jan. 6 and they seized it.
"It is that simple," Nestler says.
"It is that simple," Nestler says.
How many times have you heard a defense say "no plan"
What a colossal waste of all of our time, Nestler says. Let me be clear on behalf of US, we do not allege a specific plan to storm the Capitol. Never have. Aren't now. We don't have to prove a plan.
What a colossal waste of all of our time, Nestler says. Let me be clear on behalf of US, we do not allege a specific plan to storm the Capitol. Never have. Aren't now. We don't have to prove a plan.
The judge's instructions tell you to find guilty, don't have to establish there was a concrete plan. Just a mutual understanding or agreement. That is what a conspiracy is.
And Nestler reminds jurors, Watkins said she was part of a plan. And she was "sticking to the plan."
And Nestler reminds jurors, Watkins said she was part of a plan. And she was "sticking to the plan."
The agreement can be explicit or implicit. To protect themselves, conspirators don't often articulate every detail of the agreement but the conspirators all know what they want to try to accomplish together.
Nestler: there is absiolutely no requirement that the govt proof a written agreement, or an oral agreement. no requirement that govt prove conspirators are aware of details, or conspirators all met or even agreed to the details. Or agreed to means of conspiracy
Nest: To be clear, the evidence has shown you the defendants DID have an express agreement. An express agreement to oppose by force if necessary the lawful transfer of power. But you can find these defendants guilty w/o even finding explicit agreement; implicit will also suffice
Using PP slide, Nestler asks jurors to focus:
Seditious Conspiracy:
1. agreement
2. force
Look at messages Stewart Rhodes sent, the "Serbian plan," his open letters on the OKer website calling Trump to invoke Insurrection Act
Seditious Conspiracy:
1. agreement
2. force
Look at messages Stewart Rhodes sent, the "Serbian plan," his open letters on the OKer website calling Trump to invoke Insurrection Act
The coordination among these defendants supports an agreement. The phone records show a flurry of calls between Rhodes and his top lieutenants, Meggs, Michael Greene and Joshua James (who has already pleaded guilty)
Paul Stamey, the leader of the NC OK was at the qrf, sitting at the comfort inn in ballston, guarding the arsenal of weapon, was communicating others, not phone, zello, But an old fashioned hand radio. who had one of those at the capitol?
Jessica Watkins.
Jessica Watkins.
Each defendant came to Cap on 1/6, Meggs, Harrelson, Watkins physically breached. While Meggs/Harrelson looked for Pelosi, Watkins looked for the senators. Rhodes flipped back and forth between east/west side of cap, directing. Caldwell sent updates to those outside of DC
Graydon Young and Jason Dolan both explained that they needed numbers, they needed people. As 2 men they couldn't accomplish anything but with a mob at their back, all the extra ppl from OKers, anyone else they could recruit, they knew this could help accomplish objectives
Remember what Kelly Meggs wrote to Dolan in FL chat: 100 guys go to prison, 10k guys get in a war.
Dolan told you they didn't have sufficient #s they couldn't achieve ends
Dolan said he was prepared to die and he was prepared to be charged w/treason for what he was to do
Dolan told you they didn't have sufficient #s they couldn't achieve ends
Dolan said he was prepared to die and he was prepared to be charged w/treason for what he was to do
Dolan told Meggs he was prepared to die or be charged with treason.
And what was Kelly Meggs reply
"Lets do it"
And what was Kelly Meggs reply
"Lets do it"
Young testified that on Christmas Day he asked Rhodes if going to DC for 1/6 would be a fools errand.
Rhodes said no. "The only chance we have is if we scare the shit out of them and convince them it will be torches and pitchforks time if they don't do the right thing"
Rhodes said no. "The only chance we have is if we scare the shit out of them and convince them it will be torches and pitchforks time if they don't do the right thing"
Young never met Rhodes in person. But he told jurors he was part of a conspiracy to stop the certification
Dolan said, if all hell breaks loose, the soldiers, marines, they know oerall intent is and how to act accordingly. Rhodes was in the role of commander. He said it himself over and over. He was in charge. And he told his followers what he wanted: he did not want Biden to be POTUS
And when the opportunity arose and the timing was right, they could finally act to stop the certification by Congress, Nestler says.
Jessica Watkins said 2 mos after 1/6 during FBI interview she "knew exactly what was going to happen" once in the stack and they had nec. # of ppl to breach
Force is defined: if an act threatens/results in violence; threatens or results in harming or destroying property or harming/killing people.
That's the common definition, Nestler says.
"And here you have force in droves. From firearms, from other weapons, from brute strength."
That's the common definition, Nestler says.
"And here you have force in droves. From firearms, from other weapons, from brute strength."
Jason Dolan (pleaded guilty) said he was willing to take up arms against the government and brought guns to do it. FBI Agent Palian is now holding up the AR-15 that Dolan brought with him on Jan. 6
Remember Jason Dolan's reaction when Agent Harris brought that AR-15 up to him? Nestler asks.
Nestler asked him: Is that the firearm you brought to VA. He said yes. How do you know, Nestler asked him.
He reminds jurors what Dolan said:
Because I built it.
Nestler asked him: Is that the firearm you brought to VA. He said yes. How do you know, Nestler asked him.
He reminds jurors what Dolan said:
Because I built it.
All 3 of those rooms at the hotel in no. Va were acting as a qrf. (with OKers from FL, NC, AZ)
Nestler: Remember what Terry Cummings told you? He had not seen that many firearms in one place since his time in the military.
And that was just OKers from those states, Nestler adds
Nestler: Remember what Terry Cummings told you? He had not seen that many firearms in one place since his time in the military.
And that was just OKers from those states, Nestler adds
On brute strength, Nestler says, this is the patch Kelly Meggs wore on 1/6. He was photographed with it on his back. Nestler says govt never found it. (It was likely destroyed and otherwise went missing)
We have been focused on seditious conspiracy, but the evidence also proves beyond a reasonable doubt, the defendant's guilty for all charges, Nestler says.
Beyond sedition, there's conspiracy to obstruct congress
N: Literally what defendants agreed to do on 1/6
obstruction of congress (N: they did halt congress)
conspiracy to impede memebrs of congress
Nestler: this is literally what defendants said they would agree to do on 1/6
N: Literally what defendants agreed to do on 1/6
obstruction of congress (N: they did halt congress)
conspiracy to impede memebrs of congress
Nestler: this is literally what defendants said they would agree to do on 1/6
Each of these defendants lied to your face, AUSA Jeffrey Nestler tells jurors at the Oath Keepers seditious conspiracy trial.
We proved that. But important to ask not just whether they lie but ask yourself: why?
Because the truth is so damning, he says.
We proved that. But important to ask not just whether they lie but ask yourself: why?
Because the truth is so damning, he says.
Rhodes claimed from stand that the times of his messages were off by 1hr in evidence.
Bright was right, Rhodes does think he's smarter than everyone else, doesn't he? But he's not.
Why did he lie? Because the truth was too damning.
Bright was right, Rhodes does think he's smarter than everyone else, doesn't he? But he's not.
Why did he lie? Because the truth was too damning.
Rhodes said the times were an hour off in evidence. He was adamant he didn't tell his conspirators that 'pissed off patriots' were storming at 2PM because cap hadn't been breached, claimed he sent at 3. After the breach...well...
Nestler argues, if we're to accept Rhodes logic about the time of his message, it makes it worse for him.
So when he says that real patriots are storming, he was telling them to storm the capitol before they did
So when he says that real patriots are storming, he was telling them to storm the capitol before they did
Watkins expressed remorse the way a person who just got caught does, Nestler says
The only evidence of her remorse was her self-serving testimony now that she faces accountability for leading militia, leading effort to muscle cops out..so she herself could access senate chamber
The only evidence of her remorse was her self-serving testimony now that she faces accountability for leading militia, leading effort to muscle cops out..so she herself could access senate chamber
Nestler says Caldwell lied when he told jurors the protesters in Lindsey Graham airport video was about judiciary nom protests. He shows C'well text from Jan 8, citing the video
In vid, protester said they could have ended Graham there but wouldn't. Caldwell cited this in text:
'we could have ended him right then. I'm convinced that is the answer. traitor's punishment is clearly delinated. we all know what it is.
Nestler: why lie? truth was too damning.
'we could have ended him right then. I'm convinced that is the answer. traitor's punishment is clearly delinated. we all know what it is.
Nestler: why lie? truth was too damning.
Rhodes instructed members to delete messages. Meggs deleted them. And Woodward's suggestion that Meggs had a diff phone is quite frankly preposterous. We see msgs from his own phone where he told his wife and child he wanted to go on a shooting spree, find Pelosi 1st
It was also Meggs phone that agents found his message about looking for Pelosi first once inside
If they did use Signal to conspire to attack the US govt, stop proceedings, ask yourselves, why did they delete all of these Signal messages?
Nestler notes all testimony where Watkins discussed friends she had in Ohio (ghosthunting, owned a bar etc) All of these people who live in OH, YET Watkins drove all the way to Caldwell's farm in Va, leaving her cell phone home to meet a man she'd only met a couple times.
Think to yourself, Nestler says, when you're deliberating: why did they do this? why delete? why hide?
Nestler says the timing the defense has suggested around the OKers pushing fwd getting to rotunda doors has not been correctly argued by defense
He shows jurors clip of Meggs w/arm raised high, telling group to push fwd. Same hand signal taught to NC OKers at training in 12/20
He shows jurors clip of Meggs w/arm raised high, telling group to push fwd. Same hand signal taught to NC OKers at training in 12/20
Geyer told you today that these defendants were trash compacted.
"These defendants had agency, they had choices and they made them."
Dolan said everyone was pushing and they pushed too.
Why? Because they wanted to get inside where members of Congress were.
"These defendants had agency, they had choices and they made them."
Dolan said everyone was pushing and they pushed too.
Why? Because they wanted to get inside where members of Congress were.
Remember what Salke told you: he was literally bear hugging his colleague to save his colleague's life. He knew if the fellow cop fell, with all the heavy gear, would be knocked down and trampled as Oath Keepers and other violently push their way through the door.
Nest: Its disgusting, frankly, to hear the defense say that Cap police officers did nothing or to hear Watkins say 1/6 felt like Black Friday where there was a rush to get the new toy
Look at what was actually happening: it actually was a life or death scenario for these officers
Look at what was actually happening: it actually was a life or death scenario for these officers
The defendants aiding and abetting of damage on the doors was done when OKers tried to push through the door with others so much and using so much force that metal jambs were broken (These doors were over 20k lbs); damage by pepper spray also thanks to OKer aiding of mob
On 11/16, Caldwell told Crowl: Next time, and there will be a next time, we will have learned and be stronger.
Nestler: Recall, at the Million MAGA March, Caldwell, Rhodes, Meggs, Watkins were all there.
That included lessons learned about QRF
Nestler: Recall, at the Million MAGA March, Caldwell, Rhodes, Meggs, Watkins were all there.
That included lessons learned about QRF
Rhodes told SoRelle and others that OKers would have to "lead an insurrection or rebellion"
N: Those are Rhodes words.
Rhodes told OKers to wait patiently on, then be the leaders.
Nestler: They didn't commitinitial breach, they waited patiently, and then they were the leaders
N: Those are Rhodes words.
Rhodes told OKers to wait patiently on, then be the leaders.
Nestler: They didn't commitinitial breach, they waited patiently, and then they were the leaders
FBI is not on trial. The gov't is not on trial, Nestler says.
He defends errors made, noting there was a rush to locate these dangerous people before the inaug.
"Thank god they arrested Watkins and Caldwell before the inauguration"
He defends errors made, noting there was a rush to locate these dangerous people before the inaug.
"Thank god they arrested Watkins and Caldwell before the inauguration"
Nestler says DOJ said from the jump at trial, when msgs would fall out of sequence.
N: Not hiding anything.
We're trying to make this massive volume of evidence understandable and digestible for you. You have all of the evidence you need to find them guilty. That is sufficient.
N: Not hiding anything.
We're trying to make this massive volume of evidence understandable and digestible for you. You have all of the evidence you need to find them guilty. That is sufficient.
A conspiratorial agreement need not be explicit because that's not how humans operations. But their intent here was clear, Nestler says. They were literally agreeing to commit sedition.
Nestler addresses claim of personal security details; Woodward said gov't didn't discuss security because they were afraid of that.
Nestler: that's patently false. They, including Rhodes, Caldwell, said in msgs, they would need "legal cover" to explain what they're doing
Nestler: that's patently false. They, including Rhodes, Caldwell, said in msgs, they would need "legal cover" to explain what they're doing
Think of what personal security details are? Great legal cover, Nestler says
He adds: Not a single person came in here and told you the name of any protectees. Even Rhodes and Watkins took the stand talking about security details but couldn't name one
He adds: Not a single person came in here and told you the name of any protectees. Even Rhodes and Watkins took the stand talking about security details but couldn't name one
Stephen Brown admitted hte permit he got for Ali Alexander was only for 50 ppl max and that the rally was not realistic and never going to happen; OKers aren't real security
Defense held up witness Lee Maddox who in their words was operating a "roving personal security detail."
That's amusing, Nestler says, because he said he was nothing off the sort, he was emphatic he was in DC to watch Trump speak
That's amusing, Nestler says, because he said he was nothing off the sort, he was emphatic he was in DC to watch Trump speak
Nestler: These defendants have no insurance, no plan, no contract with anyone, no payments. How on earth could they be considered a security force?
James in stack 2 as guarding Roger Stone, but raced over to the Capitol when asked. How is that being part of PSD?
James in stack 2 as guarding Roger Stone, but raced over to the Capitol when asked. How is that being part of PSD?
Nestler: And Rhodes called conspirators to the capitol building on 1/6. Meggs called them in. If you're protecting a human being do you bring them TO the riot or lead them AWAY from the riot?
It's just that simple, Nestler says.
It's just that simple, Nestler says.
Even if they were a PSD, Nestler says, they had another intent. To stop congress. And they did. They can still be found guilty.
Defense has asked: why didnt QRF ask for weapons to be called into DC?
Nestler: Doesn't matter. It literally does not matter. The crime of conspiracy is the agreement. Actions are simply evidence of the agreement. The crime is when they agree
Nestler: Doesn't matter. It literally does not matter. The crime of conspiracy is the agreement. Actions are simply evidence of the agreement. The crime is when they agree
As Judge Mehta told you, it was a crime to enter into an agreement itself.
Plus, Nestler says of QRF, guns weren't needed. Congres was halted they were inside, they were able to do what they wanted to do
Plus, Nestler says of QRF, guns weren't needed. Congres was halted they were inside, they were able to do what they wanted to do
N: The firearms gave them confidence. They were accessible and they knew they had the QRF to help them do what they wanted if they needed
Nestler says: Remember what the Serbian advice was?
Nestler says: Remember what the Serbian advice was?
Convince the military and police to switch sides and stand with the patriots. But on afternoon of 1/6, OKers knew reinforcements were headed in, knew he would be arrested if around.
OKers knew they had to keep their manpower and firepower accessible once inside Cap
Rhodes was playing the long game. Meggs said the group would hang back, wait patiently.
Rhodes was playing the long game. Meggs said the group would hang back, wait patiently.
Rhodes achieved what he wanted on 1/6: street violence. He didn't need any shots fired, Nestler says.
During Rhodes mtg with Jason Alpers, he said "my only regret is they should have brought rifles"
During Rhodes mtg with Jason Alpers, he said "my only regret is they should have brought rifles"
Caldwell deleted conversations with Donovan Crowl after surgically unsending certain messages on FB, including deleting video, photos, Nestler says.
And after the stacks were publicized, Harrelson, Meggs deleted evidence off their phones
And after the stacks were publicized, Harrelson, Meggs deleted evidence off their phones
Now to the specious argument by the defense that the certification proceeding was over on 1/6, and therefore, defendants couldn't have disrupted anything, Nestler puts up a slide:
The certification proceeding was ongoing.
The certification proceeding was ongoing.
Watkins and Caldwell were getting intel about what was happening inside the building (Goldbold/Grimes in FB) and his phone was working because he was sending/rec'ing msgs on FB the whole time. Watkins getting updates on Zello + "Boots on the Ground" chat
She says in response to someone else's comment "Roger that brother" "Right brother" has a whole conversation about "draining the swamp" on Zello. She's not just walking around letting Zello play in background; she's speaking back, having a conversation with others
At 2:44pm 1/6, she's already violently forced her way inside and she's so engaged with Zello that Watkins gives a status update, where they is, what police were doing, what she was about to do. Why would she do that if not actively engaged or listening to what was said on Zello
Caldwell was getting alerts on his phone about what was happening. Nestler shows jurors a screen shot of Caldwell's phone from 1/6 showing he got alert from mayor about curfew; Harrelson was getting news alerts that a.m.
And the Caldwells were on the steps of the Capitol calling members of Congress pussies.
Why would they be doing that if they thought congress was done certifying the vote?
Why would they be doing that if they thought congress was done certifying the vote?
How many times did Watkins atty Jonathan Crisp say in closing that Congress was a 'dead body?'
Nestler: Congress was knocked unconscious by what these defendants did to the building that day.
Nestler: Congress was knocked unconscious by what these defendants did to the building that day.
https://twitter.com/Brandi_Buchman/status/1594742165791735808?s=20&t=jHwSjlpAAYXZ0eGIC-GSUA
And a bit about Watkins from Nestler:
He asks jurors: Why would Jessica Watkins push down the senate hallway if she thought the certification session was over?
He asks jurors: Why would Jessica Watkins push down the senate hallway if she thought the certification session was over?
Now to the claim about phone lags. There was not significant lag, Nestler says, pointing to phone and metadata experts who testified and regardless Nestler says, these defendants were TRYING to communicate. The crime is the agreement, not the completion.
N: Its rich argument from Crisp to argue that some Signal msgs were delayed on 1/6.
Watkins admitted she deleted the app off phone. If we wanted to know she rec'd them timely fashion, we'd look at phone and examine data. But we can't. Cus she deleted those msgs. Ask yourself why
Watkins admitted she deleted the app off phone. If we wanted to know she rec'd them timely fashion, we'd look at phone and examine data. But we can't. Cus she deleted those msgs. Ask yourself why
Paul Stamey was the intermediary for Caldwell and other OKers about the boat to ferry heavy weapons.
Nestler: They did not enter the Capitol to be helpful, they did not go to the Capitol to be helpful. Their presence there was not helpful.
Nestler: Kelly Meggs wrote in msg he later deleted on 1/6: FL OKers take the capitol.
Was that helpful? Taking the capitol?
Was that helpful? Taking the capitol?
Nestler: Rhodes was part of the mob on the upper west terrace and said members of congress inside the building should be 'shitting their pants, and added sic semper tyrannis.' Is that helpful?
Caldwell was on the capitol grounds, calling congress pussies, cheering. Was that helpful?
Nestler: First of all, they helped cause the riot.
Caldwell was literally on the stage Joe Biden would stand on 2 weeks in future to be inaugurated.
Caldwell was literally on the stage Joe Biden would stand on 2 weeks in future to be inaugurated.
Rhodes is on upper most level of terrace
They didn't enter the building to help. They forced their way into the building. When they encountered @libradunn, he screamed at them to leave. They did not.
They didn't enter the building to help. They forced their way into the building. When they encountered @libradunn, he screamed at them to leave. They did not.
Nestler: At least Officer Harry Dunn was able to distract these defendants so that Lazarus could escort Pelosi's staff to safety
Nestler shows next a video of USCP Agent Lazarus and Pelosi staffers running down hallway after he rescued them.
Nestler shows next a video of USCP Agent Lazarus and Pelosi staffers running down hallway after he rescued them.
Nestler: The defense claimed Lazarus could not have witnessed Meggs/Harrelson/OKer interaction with Dunn.
But the video defense showed to make this claim doesn't even show what they assert
But the video defense showed to make this claim doesn't even show what they assert
There are lots of stairwells and hallways not covered by surveillance video, including small rotunda where Dunn was, and where Lazarus saw him engage with OKers multiple times.
Defense expert didn't even know Capitol had multiple hallways
Defense expert didn't even know Capitol had multiple hallways
These defendants did not want to help anyone but themselves and their own criminal conspiracy, Nestler says.
Nestler says much was made about Watkins law abidingness.
Nestler: Jessica Watkins stormed into the building at the request of someone else who told her, go arrest those treasonous bastards.
Her fiancee's belief that she is frequently law abiding doesn't mean anything
Nestler: Jessica Watkins stormed into the building at the request of someone else who told her, go arrest those treasonous bastards.
Her fiancee's belief that she is frequently law abiding doesn't mean anything
Why were OKers yelling "treason" at members of Congress? To intimidate them, Nestler says
Harrelson was able to delete a message he had sent from SOMEBODY ELSE'S phone. That's why you don't have many msgs from Harrelson, Nestler tells jurors
Now about Abdullah Rasheed - Nestler says: No one is disputing the authenticity of the Nov 9 Go To Meeting he tipped off feds to.
And Nestler says, for all claims about Rasheed's credibility due to sex offender past: Rhodes made Rasheed a leader of Oath Keepers in WV.
And Nestler says, for all claims about Rasheed's credibility due to sex offender past: Rhodes made Rasheed a leader of Oath Keepers in WV.
The fact that he's a convicted sex offender should make you even more concerned about what Rhodes and his cronies are up to, Nestler says.
Even Mr. Rasheed, the convicted sex offender, thought what Rhodes was advocating was a bridge too far
Even Mr. Rasheed, the convicted sex offender, thought what Rhodes was advocating was a bridge too far
Nestler: Oath Keepers obeyed gun laws because they knew they would be of no use to the conspiracy if caught
Dolan said: I think Rhodes said at one pt, that was pretty stupid, but i couldn't hear it... but you heard what Rhodes thought:
Jan. 6 was the "first shot" in a war.
He could have fixed it right then and there if they brought rifles, he would hang Pelosi from a lamppost
Jan. 6 was the "first shot" in a war.
He could have fixed it right then and there if they brought rifles, he would hang Pelosi from a lamppost
Nestler: Meggs said: We make the rules. Rhodes preached to followers they were above low and decide what laws to comply with. They most certainly do not make the rules and are certainly not above the law. They are subject to same rules/laws as every other citizen.
Jurors will begin deliberations in the Oath Keepers seditious conspiracy case starting Tuesday at 9:30AM.
Jurors will not deliberate on Wed-Thurs-Friday due to the holiday. They will return on Monday to continue deliberations.
After the jurors left, Judge Mehta had a few words for the attorneys.
"If the American people are looking for an example of how our institutions work, how our democracy works, how our criminal justice system operates, we have no better example than this case."
"If the American people are looking for an example of how our institutions work, how our democracy works, how our criminal justice system operates, we have no better example than this case."
Mehta: The lawyers on both sides of this case, notwithstanding the high stakes, the novel principles, the volume of evidence for months and months and months demonstrated nothing but the highest degree of professionalism.
Mehta continued: Not only our profession should not only be proud of what you've done but people in this country should be proud of what you've done. The time you've put in, the sacrifices while separated from your families. However, this verdict comes out...
Mehta: I've been honored to preside over this trial with all of you here. Frankly, you have done more to show people how this country runs... in ways that frankly, i don't think you can appreciate.
The fate of the Oath Keepers on trial for seditious conspiracy now rests in the hand of a jury.
My report is here:
dailykos.com/stories/2022/1…
My report is here:
dailykos.com/stories/2022/1…
"Each of these defendants lied to your face,” AUSA Jeffrey Nestler said Monday, his voice carrying loud and clear. “But it is important to ask not just whether they lie. Ask yourself: Why?
Because the truth is so damning.”
ITS UP TO THE JURY NOW.
m.dailykos.com/stories/2022/1…
Because the truth is so damning.”
ITS UP TO THE JURY NOW.
m.dailykos.com/stories/2022/1…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
