Thread by @JordanOnRecord

Oath Keepers Trial Day 29. On deck for today: Closing arguments for: Kenneth Harrelson, Jessica Watkins and Thomas Caldwell. Then the DOJ's rebuttal.

Happening now: Brad Geyer, who called no witnesses and presented no defense case-in-chief, wants to argue at close that his client, Kenneth Harrelson, is a disabled veteran who entered the Capitol to help police.

Judge Mehta says, uh, jury hasn't heard any of that.

FYI: Months ago I agreed to talk to some university students about Doing Journalisms and picked this date because I thought, surely, the Oath Keepers trial would be over by then. Joke's on me. Anyway, this feed will deep out for a bit at 11 for me to do that.

This is what Geyer wanted to argue (and presumably will still try to). Problem is, none of the Oath Keepers who testified about why they entered the building, including Kenneth Harrelson's co-defendant Jessica Watkins, testified to any of this.

Geyer says the jury has seen the Florida Oath Keepers' firearms training video a lot, but Kenneth Harrelson wasn't trained at a Florida gun range, but rather by the U.S. Army.

“Ms. Rakoczy’s [closing argument] was just another insinuation of crimes not intended and crimes not committed," Geyer says.

Geyer says of Abdullah Rasheed, the Oath Keeper who recorded the Nov. 9 GoToMeeting: “If you were like me, you ran home after that guy testified and took a hot shower with anti-bacterial soap.”

Geyer: "Kenny wouldn't know what an Insurrection Act was if it bit him in the ass."

Geyer says Harrelson was appointed ground team leader to protect and escort VIPS, not to assault the Capitol: “Kenny is a veteran. Veterans have a hard time knowing when they have flip off the duty. Some of them spend a long time, sometimes years, figure out how to flip that off

Geyer: “Did you notice I didn’t call any witnesses for Kenny, not even on his behalf? Why? Because the government already did that for him.”

Geyer points to Jason Dolan and Terry Cummings, who traveled to D.C. from Florida w/ Kenneth Harrelson.

Geyer: “The fact is, Kenny wasn’t the leader of anything on January 6.”

Geyer says none of the people who initiated the first breaches have been shown to have any connection to Kenneth Harrelson or any of his co-defendants.

Geyer says the DOJ wants to convict these five defendants "for nothing more than scary words, or in Kenny's case, thoughts, or what his thoughts might be."

Geyer: DOJ's theory of the case requires a time machine because Congress had already been evacuated before the Oath Keepers entered.

Geyer: "17 minutes. He was inside for 17 minutes. They want to turn this man's life upside down over 17 minutes He needs your help."

Geyer: "The video shows the Oath Keepers put themselves between angry provocateurs and Officer Dunn. And I'm going to prove that to you, today."

Geyer, to a mass groan in the media room: "If the video doesn't fit, you must acquit."

Jurors never actually saw this "ironclad evidence" and now, it appears, Brad Geyer will be attempting to make the case in closing arguments. But, as the judge will tell the jury, closing arguments aren't evidence.

https://twitter.com/JordanOnRecord/status/1588230195147939846

Geyer's long video clips from far-away security cameras are back.

Geyer is way out away from the evidence in the case at this point. He starts talking about unspecified "bad guys" and says "Rand Paul thought his life was on the line."

Maybe the 7th or 8th sustained objection.

Geyer has his four-shot composite video up showing the crowd from incredibly far away security cameras.

"The provocateurs are active in that lower right [video]," Geyer says but, again, you can't see anything going on in these videos. This camera appears to be mounted on a roof.

Geyer has found someone he describes as "black bloc" but, and I cannot stress this enough, you cannot see the people Geyer is talking about because not only are the cameras incredibly far away but he also doesn't have the video in fullscreen mode.

Geyer moves on to another (very far away) camera angle he says shows a "goon" coming up behind Jason Dolan. Dolan didn't remember or know him. He wasn't ID'd during trial (I recognized him) but now Geyer says his name. Another objection sustained.

https://twitter.com/JordanOnRecord/status/1582804619645702144

Geyer: “You’re going to see how these hoodlums who worked together had a plan. We don’t know who they are. We’ll never know who they are. They’re ghosts.”

There's no testimony to back up any of these assertions. He never called his supposed crowd behavior expert.

Geyer: "Everything you need to know about solving this crime is on the video. And if the video doesn't fit, you must acquit."

Geyer, truly pointing to a random person: "That guy, right there. I want you to focus on him. We don't know who he is, but he's important."

There's no testimony to support any of this.

Geyer, mad the DOJ didn't show evidence he thinks they should have of "goons attacking police with mace."

"This is important evidence you should have had. Why didn't you get it?"

(Because Geyer didn't call any witnesses.)

Geyer says there's not a recorded event anyone has ever found where the Oath Keepers were anything other than respectful of police, apparently forgetting Jessica Watkins testified to interfering with police during civil disorder last week.

Geyer starts talking about 9/11, objection, Judge Mehta tries to bring him back a little closer to the case at hand.

Geyer pulls up a still image of Jason Dolan and Kenneth Harrelson. Dolan testified he and Harrelson were both chanting, "Treason!" as they entered the building (and there's video of it).

But, Geyer says, "Look at that mouth shape. Try to say 'treason' with that mouth shape."

In the Rotunda, Geyer describes the Oath Keepers as being "museum crowds at a King Tut exhibit."

Geyer tries to say Jan. 6 was the first time Kenneth Harrelson had been to D.C. but, like so many of his statements during this closing argument, there's no evidence of that. No witnesses testified to that. Objection sustained.

Geyer says Kenneth Harrelson "set up a skirmish line" to protect Officer Harry Dunn. Dunn rejected this on the stand. wusa9.com/article/news/n…

(Plugging back in to Jonathan Crisp's closing arguments, ongoing) Crisp is attacking the credibility of the government's case. He says prosecutors called a witness to lie about Jessica Watkins not filing tax returns.

Crisp says the prosecution has been "manipulating and deceiving" the jury about the Oath Keepers' pre-Jan. 6 planning and what happened on the day.

"What was the plan? 'It was implied.' How?" he asks.

Jonathan Crisp: “Ms. Watkins has more credibility than anyone on the government’s side. She has tried on multiple occasions to accept responsibility for what she did. She let them into her home and her phone and every aspect of her life.”

Crisp ends by asking the jury to acquit Jessica Watkins of all counts *except* Count 6, civil disorder, which she admitted guilt to on the stand. wusa9.com/article/news/n…

This afternoon we've got David Fischer's closing argument for Thomas Caldwell and then the DOJ's rebuttal argument and then, finally, the case will go to the jury.

Alright we're back and David Fischer is up to argue on behalf of Thomas Caldwell. I can already tell he's fired up. He says he's here to clear Caldwell's name.

Fischer starts w/ final charge against Thomas Caldwell: tampering with documents. Fischer says indictment requires Caldwell to have sent a video — not a link to a video. Then says the statute requires a "record, document or object" and a link isn't a "record." Now on the husher.

Link was to an open source video. Fischer says by definition the grand jury then had access to it.

Fischer says the FBI has the photos it claims Thomas Caldwell deleted and has had them since Jan. 19, 2021.

“Ladies and gentlemen, both Mr. and Mrs. Caldwell testified they did not delete a single, solitary photograph.”

Fischer says the FBI didn't interview Joseph or Dennis Godbold or other people Thomas Caldwell was messaging with. Fischer says he thinks a reasonable inference is they didn't interview them because they didn't take the messages seriously.

Fischer has drawn a number of objections for repeatedly using "I" statements during his closing — "I don't think Mr. Caldwell was trying to obstruct justice" — and gets snippy about it, says, "I'm going to do the same thing during their close."

On to the boat. Thomas Caldwell claims it was not his idea to get a boat, but Paul Stamey's.

Fischer says he has one word to dismiss the obstruction of an official proceeding count: Alibi. Thomas Caldwell was at the Peace Fountain when Congress was first evacuated.

"How could he possibly be obstructing and official proceeding when he's not even on restricted grounds?"

Fischer says Congress couldn't have reconvened quickly anyway because police needed time to clear the scene and investigate the shooting of Ashli Babbit.

Fischer: "When Mr. Caldwell says if we'd had guns we could have killed 100 politicians, he's basically saying it's not the way the media is portraying it."

Fischer argues this message to North Carolina Oath Keeper Paul Stamey was about Thomas Caldwell taking the NC cohort's side in the inter-militia feud with Stewart Rhodes.

David Fischer says he thinks Thomas Caldwell has "a bit of a Walter Mitty complex."

On Thomas Caldwell's disability and his wife Sharon's assistance: “She has to help him tie his shoes. She has to help him clean up sometimes after he uses the restroom. She has to help him get out of bed sometimes.”

Fischer says Thomas Caldwell was "falsely charged with a federal felony" with regards to the destruction of government property count from the original indictment. He's not now charged with it.

Fischer stresses that Thomas Caldwell wasn't on the Nov. 9 GoToMeeting or dozens of the Oath Keepers Signal chats.

Port-A-Potties

Fischer pivots to the Insurrection Act, says he doesn't think anyone in the room could even tell the jury what it means (thought I saw a little twitch from Stewart Rhodes at that statement). There's no messages from Caldwell mentioning the Insurrection Act.

Fischer: “Ladies and gentlemen, who exactly is Mr. Caldwell conspiring with? ... He had no contact with the Oath Keepers after Jan. 6. None. And he’s coordinating the QRF? How’s that work?”

Fischer: Why would you stay in Arlington if you wanted to attack the Capitol? Why not stay at an Airbnb on Capitol Hill?

Fischer says when FBI Special Agent Sylvia Hilgeman testified the purpose of the QRF was to occupy the Capitol, "I nearly fell over."

Fischer: “Ladies and gentlemen, the same folks who are telling you this conspiracy existed are the same folks telling you Mr. Caldwell had a premeditated plan to attack the Capitol.”

Fischer: "I respect the government, but I don't think they've given you a reason to believe their interpretation of messages... I said it was a bait and switch, ladies and gentlemen, and that's exactly what it is."

Fischer: “They literally interviewed hundreds of people from coast to coast who have some knowledge of the Oath Keepers and not one person has backed up their theory. Not one person.”

The current slide's header is "A Reliable Investigation?" and all of them are in what I would describe as an Alienware-esque neon green-and-black color scheme. Just so you can picture it.

Fischer about the fork text: “He’s going to gouge somebody’s eyes out? Gimme a break. He’s in bed at 8 taking his Geritol.”

https://twitter.com/JordanOnRecord/status/1592911951524683777

Fischer: “This man suffers in pain every single day because he fought on behalf of our country and was injured... in the Philippines. If anyone has the right to use his First Amendment and say things in private messages to people who get the joke, I think it’s Mr. Caldwell.”

Fischer asks for acquittal and finishes his closing argument. With that, it's just the DOJ's rebuttal left. Home stretch, folks.

AUSA Jeffrey Nestler is up now to give the government's rebuttal.

“In message after message, meeting after meeting, video after video, they said what they wanted to accomplish. They agreed with each other to do it. And then they came from all around the country to do it.”

Nestler says after the lawsuits failed and Trump didn't heed calls to invoke the Insurrection Act, the defendants were "desperate and they were ready to act. They were running out of time. On Jan. 6 they saw their opportunity and they seized it. It’s that simple.”

Nestler says evidence shows the defendants did have an express agreement, but says statute doesn't require:

- Written agreement
- Express oral agreement
- Specific details
- Conspirators all meeting or discussing agreement
- Agreeing to details
- Agreeing to means

AUSA Nestler says, listen to Jason Dolan and Graydon Young, who both pleaded guilty to joining in a conspiracy with these defendants. Listen to the message Kelly Meggs sent in response to Dolan in the Signal chat.

https://twitter.com/JordanOnRecord/status/1582459198465400832

Nestler says Jason Dolan testified about the concept of the commander's intent.

"Here, he explained, Stewart Rhodes was in the role of commander just like a military organization... and the commander wanted to make sure Joe Biden did not become president."

Nestler: "You have heard from multiple members of the stack, and they all said basically the same thing. They knew what they were going to do when they combined together, and when they got together they did it."

Seditious conspiracy requires, in brief, two elements:

- Agreement
- Force

Nestler: "Here, ladies and gentlemen, you have force in droves." Talks about arsenal of weapons Terry Cummings testified to. "And that was just Florida('s QRF)," Nestler says. wusa9.com/article/news/n…

Neslter says there were in fact multiple QRFs, all armed: Florida, North Carolina, Arizona and the collection of weapons Stewart Rhodes had with him.

Nestler plays video of Joshua James, the Stack 2 leader who pleaded guilty to seditious conspiracy, assaulting police inside the Rotunda.

"If that's not force, what is?"

Nestler: "Defendants Rhodes and Watkins and Caldwell each sat on the witness stand, and each lied to your face."

"Why lie about a fact?" Nestler continues. "Because the truth is so damning."

Nestler: “Mr. Bright was right about one thing in his closing argument. Mr. Rhodes sure does think he’s smarter than everybody else.”

Nestler says Rhodes was adamant about the timestamps on messages being off by an hour because he was sending his messages about "pissed off patriots" before the Capitol was breached, and that's damning for him.

Nestler on Watkins: “It’s hard to think of a better example of sedition than raising an army to stand against the president. If Ms. Watkins was so mortified by the violence against law enforcement, then why was she bragging afterward about muscling back police like Spartans?”

Nestler on Thomas Caldwell's testimony: "The lies were coming fast and furious."

Nestler: Rhodes didn't just encourage followers to delete messages, he outright told them to.

https://twitter.com/JordanOnRecord/status/1588197428338925568

Nestler says many defense arguments don't merit response: “Who cares about Louisville, or Hurricane relief or the date the Oath Keepers were founded? The defense apparently wants you to focus on the summer of 2020," but defendants not charged in connection to that.

Nestler says if jurors do weigh in the testimony about Louisville and Ferguson they should “consider how much these defendants were not wanted in those cities with their long rifles and their short tempers.”

Nestler says there wasn't a rush to judgement in these cases. The defendants were dangerous and that's why they were taken into custody quickly ahead of Inauguration Day.

Nestler: It's not FBI's job to interpret defendants' words, or prosecutors/defense counsel's. It's the juries.

"We submit the meaning is plain," Nestler says. "They were literally agreeing to commit sedition."

Nestler says the DOJ didn't shy away from the idea of Oath Keepers being in D.C. on private security details because they presented evidence that both Rhodes and Caldwell advised "legal cover."

"Not a single witness came in here and said the name of a protectee," Nestler says.

Nestler: "Ladies and gentlemen, these defendants had no insurance, plan, no contract, no payments. How on earth can they be considered a security force?"

Says Joshua James and Stack 2 were ostensibly guarding Roger Stone, but immediately raced to Capitol when called by Rhodes.

Nestler: “The crime of conspiracy is the agreement. Actions are simply evidence of the agreement.”

He says the armed QRF gave Oath Keepers the confidence to do what they did on Jan. 6.

Nestler, feeling very much like a response to Bright's implicit question in closing about why Rhodes didn't call in the QRF, says, Oath Keepers knew National Guard was coming in and they'd be arrested.

"Rhodes needed to keep his manpower and his firepower accessible.”

Nestler gets in a groaner too, says there are literally "boatloads" of evidence.

Nestler says Watkins' and Caldwell's testimony that they thought the certification was already over isn't credible. They were getting live updates from people outside of D.C.

Nestler, echoing Jonathan Crisp's closing argument, says Congress was not a dead body on Jan. 6 but rather knocked unconscious. Could not get back to business until everyone was out of the building.

Nestler: "A conspiracy need not be successful to be criminal. The crime is the agreement."

Nestler: "They did not enter the Capitol to be helpful. They did not go to the Capitol to be helpful. Their presence at the Capitol was not helpful."

Nestler: “They didn’t enter the building to help. They forced their way inside the building. When they encountered Officer Harry Dunn, they didn’t help. He screamed at them to leave. He told you. They didn’t.”

Nestler: "Finally, what did Graydon Young and Jason Dolan tell you? There was never — never — any discussion of going to the Capitol to help anybody. Jason Dolan said police officers were obstacles to move out of the way."

Nestler: “These defendants did not try to comply with D.C.’s gun laws because they're law-abiding. They did it because if they got arrested they would be no use to the conspiracy.”

Nestler says something about the Oath Keepers wanting to surround and starve out D.C. and might be getting a bit far afield on that one.

Nestler: "They claimed to be Oath Keepers. They did not live up to that creed. They claimed to be honoring the Constitution, but they trampled on it. They claimed to be protecting the Republic, but they fractured it instead."

Nestler: "These five people, ladies and gentlemen, believed they were above the law. No one is."

Nestler wraps up by asking the jury to find all of the defendants guilty. And with that... we've heard everything we're going to hear from the attorneys. Now Judge Mehta will say a few final words to the jury and the case will be in their hands.

Two jurors who just sat through nearly 30 days of trial have learned they are alternates and will not be deliberating. That means they get to go home (but still can't talk about/research case).

I think at that point I'd feel a bit gipped. Maybe they just want to go home, though.

And with that, my 29-day live tweet of the Oath Keepers seditious conspiracy trial comes to an end (until we get a verdict). I hope it helped you feel like you were here watching this moment in history. I suspect the Proud Boys trial may not get the same treatment (from me).

Meanwhile: No break for Judge Mehta, who is going straight into jury selection tomorrow for another multi-defendant Jan. 6 case.

Judge Mehta now offering some words to the lawyers: “If the American people were looking for examples of how our system is supposed to work, how our justice system is supposed to work, how our democracy is supposed to work… they have no better standard than this case.”

Good question. The jury is not sequestered. They will come in tomorrow and deliberate for the whole day. Then they'll have Wednesday-Sunday off and be back on Monday to pick it back up.

https://twitter.com/percipian/status/1594813251920986114