Quit threatening fellow americans and vote you piece of trash.

[aubiefifty 18,248]

Oath Keepers leader's rhetoric became aggressive in lead-up to Jan. 6, prosecutors say

Mark Hosenball

·Contributor

Fri, October 7, 2022 at 3:17 PM

 

 

As the January 2021 dates for Joe Biden's confirmation and swearing-in grew closer, public and private declarations by Oath Keepers militia group leader Stewart Rhodes became increasingly aggressive and threatening, according to evidence presented Friday at the trial of Rhodes and four other alleged members.

In a message posted in an Oath Keepers chatroom on Nov. 25, 2020, weeks after the presidential election, Rhodes allegedly stated: “Time to get serious about training. and force on force is the way to go.”

Two days later, he advised that the “patriot right” would proclaim Biden an “illegitimate usurper and impostor” and would refuse to recognize anything done by an administration of Biden and Kamala Harris, according to the prosecution. “Now is the time to stand up and organize our communities so all patriots stand together,” he said.

Later that day, Rhodes rallied his followers again: “I told you all the Dems would steal it. I also told you the judges can’t be trusted and they will go along with it because they are in the club. ... I hate being right about these things and I derive no pleasure in it. But I told you so.”

Rhodes and four co-defendants are facing multiple charges related to the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the Capitol, including a rarely used charge of seditious conspiracy that carries a sentence of up to 20 years in prison.

 

Stewart Rhodes, founder of the Oath Keepers, speaks at a rally outside the White House in 2017. (Susan Walsh/AP)

Under questioning from a Rhodes defense lawyer, Ryan McCanley, a witness for the prosecution and a special agent with the Capitol Police who has been deeply involved in Jan. 6-related investigations, acknowledged that on Dec. 6, 2020, he observed Oath Keepers engaging in peaceful and legal activity in Washington, D.C.

But according to evidence presented by prosecutors, as Jan. 6, 2021 — the date on which Congress was scheduled to confirm Biden’s presidential election victory — approached, Rhodes’s pleas and rhetoric became harsher, if not openly threatening.

According to the prosecution, on Dec. 12, 2020, Rhodes warned an Oath Keepers “Old Leadership Chat” group online that “We are going to have a fight. That can’t be avoided. But it’s better to have a fight now, while Trump is commander in chief than to wait til he is going.”

“Show the world who the traitors are and then use the ... Insurrection Act to drop the hammer on them,” Rhodes declared at an Oath Keepers rally that day in Washington, according to messages presented by prosecutors to the federal court jury. The Insurrection Act is an old and obscure U.S. law that allows the president to deploy military forces to quell a rebellion, and that federal authorities have rarely invoked in modern times.

In a Dec. 14, 2020, open letter posted on the Oath Keepers website and signed by Rhodes and Kelly SoRelle, an Oath Keepers lawyer and close Rhodes associate, the writers declared, “You must act now as a wartime president” to block the accession of “illegitimate usurpers and Chinese puppets. ... If you fail to act while you are still in office we the people are going to have to fight a bloody civil war. ... We are already in a fight.”

 

President Donald Trump rouses the faithful at a rally on Jan. 6, 2021. (Jacquelyn Martin/AP)

By Dec. 29, Rhodes had begun to realize that maybe Trump, who at some point he unsuccessfully tried to contact via an intermediary who so far has remained unidentified, might not be coming to their rescue.

“I can only guess about what is going on in his head,” he wrote in the Oath Keepers group chat, according to evidence introduced by prosecutors. “I think that part of him now understands that the Insurrection Act and warfare — with him as commander in chief, is the only way we can save our republic. But he needs to know that if he doesn’t do it, we will.”

Also on Dec. 29, Rhodes, referring to forthcoming events in Washington, allegedly advised SoRelle: “This will be DC rally number three. Getting kinda old. ... They don't give a s*** how many show up and wave a sign, pray or yell. They won’t fear us till we come with rifles in hand.”

After a break on Monday, the trial of Rhodes and his co-defendants will resume with more government witnesses on Tuesday, and is expected to last several weeks.

Meanwhile, on Thursday, the Justice Department announced that Jeremy Bertino, a leader of the Proud Boys, one of two right-wing militia-style groups that along with the Oath Keepers strongly backed Trump, had pleaded guilty to a felony charge of seditious conspiracy, the most serious of multiple charges that Rhodes and his co-defendants also face.

 

Second from left, Proud Boys member Jeremy Bertino leads a rally at Freedom Plaza in Washington, Dec. 12, 2020. (Luis M. Alvarez/AP)

Prosecutors said Bertino, who joined the Proud Boys around 2018 and at one point served as vice president of a local group branch in South Carolina, was invited by Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio in December 2020 to join a new chapter of the group known as the Ministry of Self Defense.

In the weeks before Jan. 6, 2021, investigators say Bertino participated in encrypted chats with other “self-defense” leaders, agreeing with them that Biden had stolen the election and that members should travel to D.C. on Jan. 6 to try to block the Electoral College vote, even if, investigators say, it involved the use of force.

But during a Dec. 12 trip to Washington, Bertino was stabbed during an “altercation.” He was hospitalized and released, but was still recovering from injuries on Jan. 6, so he did not go to Washington.

Despite his injuries, however, prosecutors said that as early as Jan. 4, 2021, Bertino received encrypted chat messages suggesting that the Oath Keepers were talking about storming the Capitol and that, on Jan. 6, Bertino monitored events via both social media and mainstream media.

 

Rioters scale the walls near the Capitol Rotunda on Jan. 6, 2021. (Michael Robinson Chavez/Washington Post via Getty Images)

Prosecutors say he posted messages to fellow Proud Boys urging them to participate in a Capitol siege and at one point posted a message on a public social media account declaring “DO NOT GO HOME. WE ARE ON THE CUSP OF SAVING THE CONSTITUTION.”

Tarrio and five other Proud Boys still face seditious conspiracy and other federal charges; they have pleaded not guilty and are awaiting trial. Another member of the group pleaded guilty in April to a charge of obstructing an official proceeding.

Earlier this year, three Oath Keepers members pleaded guilty to seditious conspiracy in connection with the Jan. 6 riot.

[homersapien 12,239]

**** 'em. I hope they try it again. I expect we'll be more prepared.

[SaltyTiger 8,575]

14 minutes ago, homersapien said:

**** 'em. I hope they try it again. I expect we'll be more prepared.

Sounds violent and threatening from you Brother Homer. You OK? 

[homersapien 12,239]

5 minutes ago, SaltyTiger said:

Sounds violent and threatening from you Brother Homer. You OK? 

I thought you guys were all about enforcing the law against violent rioters - much less ones intent on committing sedition.

You think that's "threatening"?

Edited October 8, 2022 by homersapien

[SaltyTiger 8,575]

9 hours ago, homersapien said:

I thought you guys were all about enforcing the law against violent rioters - much less ones intent on committing sedition.

You think that's "threatening"?

I would love to see the law enforced against all violent rioters. That should include unauthorized statue topplers, storefront busters, and graffiti artist.

Unbelievable that you “hope they try it again”. 

[homersapien 12,239]

4 hours ago, SaltyTiger said:

I would love to see the law enforced against all violent rioters. That should include unauthorized statue topplers, storefront busters, and graffiti artist.

Unbelievable that you “hope they try it again”. 

Why?

Should I just hope they abandon the effort? Obviously, that would be better for everyone, but apparently, their first failure to hijack our election process didn't register with them. It is obvious they are preparing to try again - and will keep on trying - until they are definitively stopped.  IMO, the sooner that happens, the better.

If we let Republicans subvert our election process, our democracy no longer exists.

All of the other illegal transgressions you mentioned should of course be confronted and stopped, but none of them represent a direct threat to our democracy like attacking the electoral process and congress.   

There is no equivalence. To make such a comparison shows you don't really appreciate the stakes and thus, the difference.

 

 

Edited October 8, 2022 by homersapien

[icanthearyou 4,468]

The political right is intent on destroying democracy.  They have been for a long time.

I remember William Buckley saying proudly that, "The problem in Mississippi is not that too few black people vote.  The problem in Mississippi is that too many people vote."

[SaltyTiger 8,575]

4 hours ago, homersapien said:

To make such a comparison shows you don't really appreciate the stakes and thus, the difference.

 

I was not concerned about overthrow of the government on Jan 6. Must have missed plans for future attacks in the OP

[AUFAN78 4,156]

19 hours ago, homersapien said:

**** 'em. I hope they try it again. I expect we'll be more prepared.

Should have been and had every opportunity to be prepared last time. Gross negligence. 

[homersapien 12,239]

18 hours ago, AUFAN78 said:

Should have been and had every opportunity to be prepared last time. Gross negligence. 

For something that's never occurred before in our history?  

Man, talk about blaming the victim!

But like I said, I expect them to be better prepared next time.

[AUFAN78 4,156]

On 10/9/2022 at 11:58 AM, homersapien said:

For something that's never occurred before in our history?  

Man, talk about blaming the victim!

But like I said, I expect them to be better prepared next time.

What? Intel predicted a problem. Proper precautions were not taken. End of story.

SMH

You'd hope a lesson was learned. Like pay attention to details.

[homersapien 12,239]

12 hours ago, AUFAN78 said:

What? Intel predicted a problem. Proper precautions were not taken. End of story.

SMH

You'd hope a lesson was learned. Like pay attention to details.

Got a reference for that claim?

And let's not forget who was in charge of the executive branch - and by definition the person in charge of intel - as well as responding to same.

But I certainly agree that Trump was grossly negligent.  In fact, he was totally responsible.

Edited October 11, 2022 by homersapien

[AUFAN78 4,156]

12 hours ago, homersapien said:

Got a reference for that claim?

And let's not forget who was in charge of the executive branch - and by definition the person in charge of intel - as well as responding to same.

But I certainly agree that Trump was grossly negligent.  In fact, he was totally responsible.

Sure.

DODIG-2022-039 V2 508.pdf

Let's not indeed.

Wrong. Read and learn.

Edited October 12, 2022 by AUFAN78

[homersapien 12,239]

17 hours ago, AUFAN78 said:

Sure.

DODIG-2022-039 V2 508.pdfUnavailable

Let's not indeed.

Wrong. Read and learn.

Sorry, but that was a fail.

[AUFAN78 4,156]

1 hour ago, homersapien said:

Sorry, but that was a fail.

Obviously you did not read the report. Here are important excerpts:

"Mr. Miller and GEN Milley met with the President at the White House at 5:30 p.m.," the IG reported. "The primary topic they discussed was unrelated to the scheduled rally. GEN Milley told us that at the end of the meeting, the President told Mr. Miller that there would be a large number of protestors on January 6, 2021, and Mr. Miller should ensure sufficient National Guard or Soldiers would be there to make sure it was a safe event. Gen Milley told us that Mr. Miller responded, 'We've got a plan and we've got it covered.'"

In advance of the Jan. 6 rally, the president told the most senior civilian and uniformed leaders of the military he knew the event was going to draw a "large number of protestors.

 

The Pentagon memo also yields insight into the mindset of the Democrat-led Congress, top military officials and the local police before Jan. 6. Key players, it reveals, repeatedly raised concerns about accepting the offer of National Guard help, fearing it would create the perception of a military coup or martial law as the election results were certified.

Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy told the IG "he did not want to create the perception that the military was involved in the electoral process," according to the memo. "He said that Mr. Miller made it clear that the military would not be involved in certifying the election results and that 10 different news agencies asked him about military use and martial law."

District of Columbia Police Chief Robert Contee also opposed having National Guard troops, but for a different reason. "Chief Contee explained to us that he did not want other Federal law enforcement involved on January 6, 2021, because of the risk associated with having unidentified Federal officers carrying weapons within D.C," the memo recorded.

Even as key security officials were shrinking from deploying National Guard troops lest the "optics" send the wrong political message, the Capitol Police was being flooded by the FBI, the Marshal's Service and the Homeland Security Department with raw intelligence warning of possible violence.

 

Those intelligence reports, which started flowing more than two weeks before the riot, flagged online chatter about waging a "bloody war," using nerve gas, concealing guns, and burning down the Supreme Court and specifically flagged two groups for possible trouble, the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers.

"Right-wing extremists are talking about tunnels below the Capitol Complex and the allegiances of USCP officers," Capitol Police intelligence expert John T. Nugent Jr. wrote in an email Dec. 21, 2020 sent to a distribution list of the department's Intelligence and Interagency Coordination Division.

Despite the warnings, the president’s offer of troops wasn’t accepted and the Capitol Police did not take a security posture on Jan. 6 commensurate with the threats.

[homersapien 12,239]

Can't read what you can't open.