Day 21 of Oath Keepers Trial - Nov 4
Mehta called everyone in early today, (8:30), to go through the procedural confusion of who gets to question and cross exam co-defendants witnesses - when, why, under what circumstances, etc. Especially related to when one of the defendants themself testifies. (Rhodes, being the most likely example - expected today.) Do all the co-defendants’ attorneys get a crack at Rhodes, or only if he inculcates their particular client?
AUSA simply wants ‘The Court’ to make the determination on a case-by-case basis. (Of course he does . . . as he knows Mehta has come down on their side far more often than not.) Woodward - for Meggs - argues there’s no clear controlling case precedent in the DC District that provides guidance. The defense of course is just looking for fairness and equity in this.
Nestler is now discussing whether or not he can have a stable of FBI witnesses watching the defense proceedings . . . even though they may be called back for the government’s rebuttal case. Fischer argues the ample precedent for not having ANY potential witness sit in court and hear all the testimonies before being brought to or back to the witness stand, and being influenced by prior testimony. Mehta of course agrees with Fischer, but is going to make certain exceptions for Agents who are specifically the ‘case agent’ of a particular defendant.
Mehta says the jury is now asking about “Thanksgiving schedules.” Crisp expresses that he doesn’t think we will still be here by then. Crisp then takes up that 10-minute video argument from last night. Mehta agrees to allowing the full ten minutes. (Maybe he saw my tweet freakout over that last night? Ha!)
(***NOTE: The FBI Agents all remained in the courtroom. Hmmm.)
——
Mehta wishing to get everything going early, was hoping the witness held over from yesterday would already be here, get the jury in, and rock-n-roll . . . unfortunately, the witness hasn’t yet arrived. Long pause . . . then Mehta asked about more Rule 29 discussions . . .
Jury seated at 9:20 . . . Montana Siniff, fiancé of Jess Watkins, returns to stand for his redirect by Crisp. Mehta, having relented on the viewing of full 10-minute video . . . full context of previously presented edited version by government of OK operation in Louisville, KY in 2020.
<Mehta calls side bar 2 minutes into video>
Video continues . . . without comment or explanation of sidebar . . .
——
Video primarily shows BLM activists getting up the faces of OKs, taunting and threatening them, as they calmly keep their cool standing guard in a Hampton Inn parking lot - downtown Louisville. (Not exactly sure what they are protecting.) Video shows appearances by Rhodes, Watkins, and the current witness.
In the video, the OKs are wearing full tactical gear, and most are carrying firearms. Lot’s of press filming the entire scene and protest march. Evidence of boarded up buildings.
Crisp begins asking Siniff about their purpose and intentions in Louisville that day. “To render protection and medical aid.” He describes treating the injuries of BLM rioters who had direct violent encounters with police lines.
“Were you always carrying weapons at these events?”
“Yes, expect at MMM march in DC.”
“Did you ever use those weapons?”
“Absolutely not.”
“If your business had not been struggling financially, would you have been more inclined to go to DC on J6?”
“Maybe, but I still had hesitations about the OKs disorganization and VIP protectees.”
Questions about what he told the FBI about why Watkins went into the Capitol building - and his conflicting statements on that issue yesterday. “Went in to look at paintings.” “Went in to render aid after hearing about shots fired.” But had received a message from Watkins about her having “stormed” Capitol.
Crisp continues to ask about his personal knowledge of what gear and weapons Watkins took to various other events. Also about her general demeanor was when being accosted at various events. (Calm and friendly.)
No further questions.
Siniff dismissed.
——
Elmer Stewart Rhodes III is called to the witness stand . . . Linder starts direct . . . begins taking general questions about his poverty-stricken upbringing, his patriotism, and the history of his family member’s long history of service in various branches of military, wars, conflicts.
Talk about his own entry into the Army, washing out of SF training, going into paratrooper training. Spent six years in military. Honorably discharged, disabled veteran. Began training security guards for various clubs and casinos in Las Vegas while attending UNLV. Graduated UNLV in ’98 with 4.0 GPA. Political science major. Then worked for Rep. Ron Paul as a staffer. Rhodes describes his political orientation as “libertarian” which attracted him to Ron Paul.
Eventually took his LSAT to get into law school. Won award while at Yale for best paper on the Bill of Rights.
Discusses his problems with Bush administration’s evisceration of constitutional rights following 9/11 - especially the fact our government can now call any US citizen an “enemy combatant” for any reason, any time. The fact the Supreme Court has upheld that, he deems a serious mistake, and highly unconstitutional. Considers himself a constitutional expert, as his primary concentration in law school. Moved to Montana to practice law after passing bar.
——
Started Oath Keepers in 2009. Gives primary reasons, first as an educational platform to help military and LEOs to understand the difference between lawful and unlawful orders, as related to their Oath to the constitution.
(Rhodes directly faces and addresses jury during his long answers.)
Describes the OKs as a multi-racial organization. His board consists of multi races. Would dismiss anyone found to be or exhibit racist ideas, along with neo-nazis, communists, etc.. (Rhodes being multi-racial, himself.) Obviously an organization focused on recruiting former and current military, LEOs, and first responders. A lot of their recruits are retired and “aged-out’ but still had a desire to serve their country.
Because the suicide rate is so high among ex-military, OKs gave them a continued sense of purpose, especially disaster relief missions. (Participated in 14 hurricane events, including in Puerto Rico.) Established the national OK organization, but also state and local.
Also provided security for events. First big event was in Ferguson, MO, after Michael Brown shooting in 2014. Rioters had threatened to burn down entire buildings - including minority businesses and homes. From rooftops they protected these properties, despite opposition from local law enforcement.
——
Describes the legal distinction between ‘volunteer’ security ops, vs. “paid” security companies. Volunteers can’t be stopped from voluntarily offering to protect private properties. Eventually started providing voluntary security operations at events all over America - including 9 in DC, itself.
Explains that currently serving LEOS who are members of OKs are legally allowed to carry at events where gun rights are more restricted - even in DC and Berkley, CA. As a rule, they would contact local law enforcement in advance to let them know they were coming, and clear any weapons questions in advance.
Describes various security events and exactly what properties there were protecting. Talks about the 10-minute Louisville video, the minority properties they were there to protect, and who and why the OKs shown remained calm when being taunted and screamed at by BLM protestors.
OK peak membership was 40,000. At no time in their history has there ever been an incident in which any criminal charges have ever been leveled against the OKs, in hundreds of security operations. No firearms charges. No firearm use. No weapons used against any protestors or rioters of any kind - not even pepper spray.
——
Begins describing types of weapons street rioters use. (Frozen water bottles, chains, bike locks, knives, clubs, etc.) Antifa tactics. This is why they wear helmets and tactical gear - body armor - when on security details.
He supports the right to protest, but he doesn’t support the right to arson - which is deadly force. Refers to George Floyd as being “murdered.” Has actually protected BLM marches against neo-nazi counter protestors.
Describes the purpose and use of a QRF. (Quick Reaction Force). Always a back-up, contingency of both weapons and medical gear should any operation go bad. The DC QRF was primarily a deterrent against Antifa’s public threats against Trump . . . and because they didn’t act, and because Trump didn’t declare Insurrection Act, the QRF from VA hotel was never needed.
“Let’s talk about the election.”
Rhodes was unhappy with the election results, and he believes it was an invalid and unconstitutional election, before the subject of fraud comes up.
Linder enters Article 2 of Constitutional into evidence. Then begins Rhodes reading and describing his understanding of the violations in various states of the federal constitution and state constitutions - because of COVID emergency declarations - that literally made the 2020 presidential election “invalid.” (Fraud not included.)
Mehta calls for morning break at 10:47.
——
***NOTE: Both the media room and courtroom are full today. Obviously because of the interest in Rhodes’ testimony. Many of the press “on-air” personalities are out, which means when we leave the courtroom today, there will be TV cameras at all the exit points, and live updates being broadcast from all over the property.
Also . . . Rhodes is quite eloquent, and intellectually bright. It’s easy to see why he could attract thousands to membership in the OKs, though apparently, by both friendly and unfriendly witnesses, his organizational skills seem to be hugely in question.
Mehta returns at 11:05 to say there will be an 11:30am hard stop for the jury today.
——
Jury reseated at 11:07 . . . Linder continues questioning Rhodes. Both agree to speak a little slower for the sake of court reporter and jury.
Linder asks Rhodes to describe what they’ve seen in various “stand down” orders at various events. Incidences where police forces in many riots received literal stand orders during BLM and Antifa riots, and OKs would step in to provide security and protective services as volunteers. Often embarrassing local law enforcement into action themselves.
A lot of their chapters began to go dormant when Trump first took office, but then began to ramp up again when the post-Floyd riots began in 2020.
Linder asks about their use of the Signal chat app. They chose Signal that did not ‘deplatform’ them for political speech. (They’d been previously booted off of Discord.) Moved to Signal because that wouldn’t happen. Would create different chat groups for each operation, in additional to the national, state, and local chat groups. Also had leadership chats. They also had journalists and other antagonists who would infiltrate certain chat groups. They had hundreds of chat groups, because they set one up for every operation - and did hundreds such ops.
——
Begins to discuss Michael Greene, (Whip), who he first met at Hurricane Harvey relief efforts, and describes his military background and multi-discipline skills. Also talks about a couple more of their key board members.
Now discussing the planning for OKs at the scheduled Million MAGA March, as well as his open letter to the President about insurrection act . . . which he considered as much as a warning to Antifa, as anything else. They organized two different teams for that event on November 14, 2020.
Talk about their coordination with Secret Service outside of barricade lines to escort their VIPS to cars - even with fully-armed current LEOs, in DC. Explains they don’t care which political party any VIP is part of. Obviously, if it’s a Trump rally, it’s probably a Trump supporter, but at hurricane relief operations there are no party concerns or questions.
Because of their reputation, they began getting requests for volunteer security for individuals all over the country for their speaking events and personal appearances. On J5, they provided escort protection at both Freedom Plaza and SCOTUS events - start to finish. They made sure they wore the OKs colors and logos at all events, which was based on black and gold of Army Rangers.
Mehta dismisses jury for weekend . . . Rhodes will continue testimony on Monday morning.
——-
Mehta asks Linder about expectations of how much longer Rhodes direct questioning will take, and then how many of the co-defendant attorneys might question Rhodes . . . cross . . . redirect, etc. Then, more legal housekeeping about various other motions.
Court’s in recess until Monday morning. (11:37am)
Short day . . . no fireworks. Just the increased media presence due to Rhodes being on the stand.
Stay tuned for a video update and wrap-up of the week, later this afternoon. (I’ve got some rather pointed observations of Judge Mehta’s thumb increasingly applying more pressure on the scales.)
——
