***NOTE: Today's compendium of Tweets is presented unedited - typos, maddening spellchecks, warts and all . . . (It's been a crazy last 24 hours!)
Day 23 of Oath Keepers Trial - Nov 8
Bombshells coming . . .
Attorney Bright informed me this morning, Court might be going into immediate sealed meeting, related to “witness matters” that have come up over night.
Bright - Rhodes’ counsel - received notice last night of the possible ‘heart attack’ of a witness with exculpatory testimony . . . (who also may be a CHS??). This news was given to myself and Alan Feuer this morning, directly from Bright . . . he told us that the government itself is turning him into a conspiracy theorist, considering two of their witnesses have been indicted and two others interviewed by FBI since they were named on Rhodes’ witness list. And now . . . this?
——
At 9am, Mehta asked Bright to open, who suggested a sealed session. Metha asked everyone to go to sidebar phones, first to discuss whether or not they needed to clear the courtroom.
<This has been a long sidebar>
Bright puts on the record that their witness, McWhirter(sp?) , (VP of OKs) was boarding a flight last night and allegedly a flight attendant was alerted to what might be a heart attack in progress - attributed to some ‘long covid’ issue. Bright is asking the court to accommodate either juggling order of witnesses, and the possibility of flying to him for a Deposition.
Nestler steps forward to explains that two of Rhodes’ witnesses my have a 5th amendment issues, due to government’s ongoing J6 investigations:
Darrio Aquino - set for today - intends to waive 5th amendment despite his attorneys advice against.
Ricky Jackson - has “serious exposure” - due to newly opened investigation against him.
Bright personally and professionally feels the government is putting pressure on Jackson for the purpose of suppressing his testimony.
Nestler just shrugs and says they notified defense counsel they had a couple witnesses with exposure issues.
——
Woodward now steps forward to say they had put these witnesses on list weeks ago, and believes that in the MIDDLE of their ‘case in chief’, suddenly their witnesses are being threatened with prosecution.
Mehta literally steps forward and say there is no precedence in case law restricting the government from continuing to investigate and indict people on witness lists.
Woodard says . . . after spending two hours prepping McWhirter for testimony, he suddenly has a ‘heart attack’ the night before his testimony? (This, adding to the other two witnesses ‘suddenly’ contacted by FBI. AND . . . McWhirter, despite the fact he was in route to testify - didn’t contact Woodward, but instead CONTACTED THE FBI about his health issue? (HELLO!?!?)
——
Mehta asks . . . Is their Undue influence by the government? If so, does he need to notify the witness? Mehta thinks he shouldn’t make that kind of enquiry of witness, because it might scare the witness into taking the 5th, and the defense losing their witness.
(I call BS on his personal concern. Sorry . . . that’s just where I’m at with him.)
Woodard says in the last 15 hours THREE different defense witnesses have been contacted by the government.
Mehta is looking for a way to move this forward . . . not sure if he has an obligation to appoint a lawyer to Jackson. Nestler recommends it. Woodward says he will look for precedent. Mehta says he doesn’t have authority to grant immunity.
Nestler prepared to submit proffer as to why these witnesses might have exposure.
——
Fischer stands to say that, “this trial is being DISTORTED,” because government had knowledge of these witnesses exposure as much as 20 months ago, and the timing of the government’s last minute interferences are extremely suspect.
Mehta is asking if they believe the government has done anything unethical. Either counsel or FBI? “And I haven’t heard anyone say that, yet.”
Woodward is back to say he now has 6th amendment concerns about his ability to defend his client due to government’s “timing” of their interference with witnesses.
Mehta has directly asked defense if they are implying wrongdoing? (They are certainly implying this, without outright accusation.)
Bright returns to say they have Lee Maddox (witness) ready to testify today … in the spirit of moving forward … but that their intended witness list of having four witnesses ready today has been interdicted by current circumstances. McWhirter, Dario Aquino, Ricky Jackson were all schedule today. Tomorrow … Michael Greene (Whip)
Woodward steps forward to say they have one of their witnesses driving down, who can probably be added today, to help keep moving forward.
——
Fischer wishes to put government on notice (Rule 807) that they are going to ask to move in their witnesses previous statements, regardless of their 5th Amendment status. Government says they will contest this motion.
Nestler says he’s willing to consent to fly to Montana to get the deposition from McWhirter - if necessary - assuming all parties consent.
Mehta says he wants to keep moving things forward as best as possible, even if only two witnesses today . . . and will then begin addressing these problems as soon as they can get the details on McWhirter’s condition and look at pertinent case precedent.
Woodward is emphatic that he is hesitant to give the government ANY witness list under 24-hour rule . . . considering current circumstances.
——
Bright - for Rhodes - calls Lee Maddox to stand - from Cheyenne, WY.
(I missed his entire testimony in preparing for my radio interview, but got back just in time to witness even MORE fireworks in the courtroom . . . related to the events of this morning) . . .
——
Defense witness Mr Aquino was called to stand, and his own attorney (Crawley) addressed the court to declare his intention to invoke his 5th Amendment privilege not to testify.
Mehta sent the jury out of the courtroom, along with My Aquino. Bright come forward to explain to the Court the content and purpose of Aquino’s testimony. Mehta is trying to determine whether or not to allow Aquino to please the 5th.
Bright explains that Aquino was in his hotel room having lunch and warming up when all the other events shown in this trial were taking place. That only possible charge he could face from government is that of entering a restricted space . . . long after all barricades had been removed and after thousands of people were already not he Capitol grounds. That he couldn’t know he was in a restricted space.
The government then explains that Aquino was also on many of the Signal chat groups, and was personally invited by Rhodes to accompany him that day.
Fischer rises to argue that the government was able to submit and use Aquino’s own chat messages inter case-in-chief, but now they are being prevented from having the witness explain those messages. That this is what the government is “distorting’ this case.
——
Mehta interjects and tells Fischer he’s being doing this long enough that any witness can invoke the 5th in just these types of circumstances.
Bright argues they would like to question him specifically about the aspects of his interactions that day with Rhodes that does not address the potential charges the government might file against Aquino.
Aquino’s attorney returns to lectern to state he feels imposed upon - as a defense attorney - to argue against other defense attorneys, but that he believes Rhodes’ attorneys acted out of order in contacting his client without his permission.
Bright gives passionate and angry defense of his actions, that while he may have stepped out of turn, he had already issued apologies to both the court and Aquino’s attorney, and that if the court allows Aquino to invoke the 5th, he will fight back vigorously on the other witness with similar problems.
Mehta asks everyone to take a step back, cool their heels - that believes everyone is operating in good faith . . . BUT . . . he will likely allow Aquino to please the 5th.
——
Woodward stands and asks the court to grant Aquino immunity. (Denied.) Mehta says he doesn’t have the authority or the power. Woodward says he will work on getting him the authority. (Wow.)
There is a pause in the action as Aquino and his attorney are in hallway having a discussion about possibility for limited testimony. Mehta asks someone to go out and see how that is going.
Bright reminds Court this is only the second time in 10 months he’s showed his temper. Mehta tells him not to worry about it.
<sidebar>
Crisp comes forward to let the court know that defense will not challenge Aquinos invoking the 5th, and they can go ahead and proceed forward.
Metha determines it’s best to break for early lunch, and figure out whether or not they are going to have the same problem with Rhodes’ next witness - Mr. Jackson - and how to proceed from there.
Lunch break called at 12:03pm
——
Mehta back on bench at 1:06pm . . . Woodward says that he believes his client has been prejudiced by having the jury out for so long, and that the jury should be instructed to disregard anything they heard while the jury was still in room.
Nestler comes forward to read from Red Book instructions on how to inform jury about witnesses who invoke the 5th. Bright wants a more general “disregard” the witness. Nestler wants the specific Red Book instruction. Mehta polls the room on how many of them actually heard Aquino invoke the 5th, not knowing if the jury even heard it. Several raised their hands.
Bright says that out of an abundance of caution, he prefer an innocuous jury instruction. Nestler is back to argue for Red Book instruction. Mehta is going to throw the defense this time little bone, and simply instruct jury to disregard anything they may have heard from Aquino.
Mehta: There is no settled law in this Circuit about granting immunity to a witness, but that in other Circuits, there are instructions which states the the witnesses right may actually be violated if they are NOT granted immunity . . . when prosecutorial overreach might interfere with a witnesses testimony. Other Circuits recognize that there are extraordinary cases when the court might run afoul in not granting immunity. 7th and 9th have found that not granting immunity in certain circumstances distorts the defense’s ability to present their case. The DC Circuit has not acknowledged that process. Leaving those case precedents with everyone as “food for thought” and may ask the government to present reasons why he shouldn’t grant immunity. ‘Chew on that overnight.”
Jury reseated at 1:20pm
——
Mehta instructs jury to disregard anything they may have heard from Aquino, and that he will not be bacon the stand.
Ed Tarpley - for Rhodes - calls Ricky Jackson to the stand - from Georgia. Grew up in Iowa. After HS, went in to Army for 7.5 years, active. Went into Army reserves for 20 years, and then earned his BA and MA after active duty. Worked for US government for 47 years. Retired for 1.5 years.
Became aware of OKs while living in MA, but joined them after moving to Georgia, in fall of 2020. Joined because other GA OKs told him of the “family” and service activities. Never attended any other OK event before J6 in DC.
With regards to his thoughts about the political events of 2020, he was worried about civil unrest, especially in his ‘over-55’ community. He was invited by other OKs to attend event in DC. He drove with another individual (Brian Ulrich) who needed a ride. They met with three other individuals out side of Georgia - one of those being Joshua James.
Own January 5th they arrived in DC to learn what their PSD would be for the day on 5th. (Roger Stone) He did not bring a firearm with him to either DC or his VA hotel. Five of them provided transportation and security for Roger Stone for event at SCOTUS, and then at another event in Freedom Plaza. That was the extent of their duties on 5th.
——
On 6th, they arrived in DC what event they’d be accompanying Stone on that day, but there was a lot of confusion. They went back to their hotel, after being informed it would be too difficult to navigate crowds with Stone. They stayed at their hotel for about an hour and a half. Joshua James asked if anyone wanted to go to Capitol to assist in crowd safety. He agreed, and they went back to DC and retrieved their golf carts which had been assigned to them. By then, the Capitol was completely surrounded by thousands of people. There were too many people for the golf carts, so they eventually walked to east side of building where there was less people. He went and stood next to police line, and never saw any violence or agitation with LEOs from his vantage point.
James eventually self they were going to walk down to the central steps of the Capitol. They eventually began to make their way to the top of the stairs. He heard James say they were going into the Capitol. He said he shouted up not to go into Capitol, and then took a position next to an officer, and had a general conversation with the officer - including asking questions about the “woman who had been shot.” The LEO had no info. When he observed that tear gas and pepper spray were being deployed, he moved back down to the bottom of the stairs.
He was separated from the team, but had lost cell signal on his phone, and waited at bottom of stairs of them to reemerged from Building. When USPC officer were exiting building, he helped get the crowd out of the way so that he could help them reach a safe place. He told the officers, “I’ve got your back.” After escorting police out of the area, they were able to gather with a larger group of OKs at the NE corner of Capitol Building, where Stewart Rhodes was all present. Had only met him briefly the day before, on J5.
——
Did Rhodes ever discuss entering the Capitol. No. Was there ever a PLAN discussed to enter th Capitol. Had he heard of a plan, what would he have done? He’d have got in his truck and went home.
Police started throwing flash grenades into crowd with no warning. they were far enough way, but decided it was time to get away from the areas. Went to SCOTUS building, then got on their golf carts and finally worked their way back to their VA hotel for 4th reminder of the evening. They then left “bright and early” the next morning and drove back home with Brian and two other individuals. Has had no other interactions with OKs, since.
Was contacted by FBI on April of ’21.
No further questions….
——
Geyer - for Harrelson - wishes to cross witness. Mehta calls a sidebar.
No defense crosses. Government begins cross by Hughes, who begins by going back to Signal chats from GA chat group. He was added to the group chat on Dec. 11, 2020.
“I would like to get some. I would like to get some.”
Hughes shows chats from others in group, in which he responds that they can take “non-lethal” items. Then other messages he added to group:
12/20: “January 6th. The Great Reset. American or not.”
12/22: John Paul Jones: “I’ve not yet begun to fight.”
Now she references Rhodes open letter about “Trump needing to do his duty . . . and if he fails . . . “
Jason responds: ‘The Red line in the sand.” He claims to not remember sending that. Then another message from Jackson which he claims to not remember sending.
——
She has him identify the other OKs he was with during PSD for Roger Stone on 6th. She asks him about his timelines on returning to his hotel, and then back to Capitol. They went to retrieve golf carts at Willard Hotel in DC. She begins replay of animate map video that shows their route back to Capitol, with Roberto Minuta driving cart lead cart, and Minuta is narrating video. Jackson is in second cart.
“You’re aware at this moment that this was not a peaceful protest.” No. Claims he couldn’t Minuto from other cart. She asks him if he was aware of the specific address entered into maps for their destination. She asks if he had contact with Rhodes. “No ma’am.”
Minuta: “Word is, they got in the building.”
Jackson: “If that’s what you have, then that’s what he said.”
You heard Roberto Minuta berating and screaming at LEOs? “Yes ma’am.” Hughes enters video showing Minuta berating LEOs, with Jackson present.
Hughes brings another video into evidence, and proceeds to try and get Jackson to conflate his casual conversation with LEOs vs. Minuta’s berating behavior. Then she gets him to acknowledge that he sees his other team members going through the east doors. (He did not.) He continues a series of “Yes, ma’ams” to most of her questions, except to affirm that he had gotten separated from the rest of the team, and couldn’t be sure of their actual movements and activities.
Hughes enters another video into evidence, and asks Jackson if she hears Minutas voice. He says she cannot tell.
<sidebar>
——
Hughes shows another video with some more audio berating LEOs. Hughes asks Jackson to once again identify Minuta’s voice. A heated exchange begins, as he tries to explain he was interacting with the LEOs he’d helped to a safe location, and couldn’t answer the question she is asking. He asked the court if he can speak freely. Mehta instructs to answer question, and he snaps back at Hughes with a long answer about helping LEOs, and had no idea what other conversions, positive or negative were taking place. She continues to press him to acknowledge he was close enough to recognize the voices of his team after they left the building. He refuses.
She finally moves on to showing photos of where they gathered later with larger group on NE side of Capitol. She now is showing additional messages he exchanged with Joshua James on Signal from January 7th - James checking in to see if he made it home okay. Then shows that he changed his message setting on Jan 12 so that all messages would delete automatically after one day.
She tries to get him to admit that his location and behavior could expose him to criminal charges. he refuses to acknowledge that.
No further questions . . .
——
Tarpley on redirect:
“Was it your plan to overthrow the government of the 6th with a golf cart?” . . . no sir.
“Had you ever met Roberto Minuta before arriving in DC?” . . . no sir.
“You were on a different golf cart from Minuta, and couldn’t hear what he was say8ing? . . . that’s correct.
“Is it crime to engage in raucous language directed at police?” . . . I don’t believe so, under the 1sr amendment freedom of speech.
Jackson acknowledges he didn’t participate in many chats. Tarpley asks if he’s ever been charged with a crime for his activities on J6. “No sir.”
No further questions . . .
<sidebar>
——
Mehta explains to jury that they are going to take a break from Rhodes’ case-in-chief, and switch to Meggs’ case in chief by calling their first witness.
Woodward - for Meggs - calls Don Siekerman to stand. (replaces his mask with a clear mask, because his wife is having surgery.)
Woodward asks what his position was a leader of his group. (3 years active duty Army. 3 to 4 years in Guard.) Joined OKs first time 2014, in response to their work in natural disasters. His work at the time made it too difficult to do much with OKs. Had a long career as both volunteer fighter and as a police officer in Mechanicsburg, PA.
Explores his difficulty remembering things, because he had serous case of COVID, that destroyed his thyroid . . . and has learned since of the other difficulties associated with long covid.
Siekerman reengaged with OKs a few days before the Million MAGA March in DC, (Nov. ’20) he basically provided voluntary security by just walking around and observing the proceedings.
Mehta calls for afternoon break at 2:48pm.
——
Court resumes at 3:06pm . . . Direct of Siekerman resumes . . . he acknowledges that he participated in the Stop the Steal rally in Atlanta . . . standing in front of speakers’ stage all day, and interacted with GA State Police chatting about police work and ‘war stories’ all day.
Doesn’t recall names of speakers in Atlanta without prompting from Woodward. Recalls escorting Ali Alexander around to back of stage, using wedge formation to get their protectee through the crowd, and might have placed hands on back of person in front of him.
Siekerman was asked to take a leadership at J6 event. Communicated with other OKs through Signal platform. (He has a very difficult time remembering specific names of people and things, without help from Woodward.)
Looking at a specific message he sent, he talks about carrying a few “kits” with him: plastic bags, TP, wet wipes, in case ports potties not well supplied. Med kits, IFAK kit, to be prepared for possible injuries or traumas - even for everyday issues and accidents in such large crowd.
Recognizes an invitation to a Leadership Call. Never heard anything related to going into Capitol or stopping the election. Says if he’d ever heard any such talk he’d never had gone to DC.
Shows chat where he describes LEOSA qualified retired and active duty LEOs. He spoke directly to District PD to inquire about specific restrictions of any of their OKs might be qualified under LEOSA.
——-
More innocuous Signal messages and chats are shown, including one in which Jessica Watkins describes her desire to attend J6 to help with PSDs and not as a spectator. He interacted with her as she is an experienced Army medic and EMT. There is ongoing talk about his efforts in scheduling certain people for 7th events of the day, including displays of brochures, fliers, and maps indicating where and when various events would take place - including parking restrictions.
More detailed planing messages for PSDs, including messages about acknowledging the support back home of family who put with their activities away from home. Even on J3, he sent message n anticipation that they may have problems with cell signals in such large crowds and suggested alternate forms of comms, like may even a Ham operator to set up rely point to establish more consistent comms.
He describes not feeling well unwell on Sunday evening before J6, and on Monday morning he felt so bad he went to the doctor, and was diagnosed with COVID. As a result, he was unable to attend J6 rally. He was so sick on the day of J6 he had no idea what had taken place . . . until he learned later. He was very angry, because it went against everything that he stands for - especially the injuries to place officers, and the grief to them and their families. He acknowledges the suicides of officers afterwards, and says he’s had experiences like that.
He says he can’t say 1000% had he been there - because of crowd psychology - that he wouldn’t have participated. But he’s 99.999% sure he would have moved everyone away from the troubles.
As the operational planner for the OKs on January 6th, was there any discussion of plans to enter the Capitol or overthrow the electing results? . . . “No.”
No more questions . . .
No defense crosses . . .
——
Government begins cross exam . . . and begins asking Siekerman about his career in a small town police department. Gov asks him to describe LEOSA to the jury . . . which gives retired and Active duty officers to carry their weapons in other jurisdictions. He is asked if he could carry firearms in DC . . . but Siekerman emphasizes that there are nuances - not without restrictions.
Begins asking Siekerman about his memory issues, and then his post-J6 interviews with DOJ officials. But due to his increasing struggles, he informed AUSA Ahmed Basset that he’s been diagnosed with memory problems due to his “covid fog” - through a letter.
Gov atty implies that he “can’t remember anything.” But Siekerman explains it ‘comes and goes,’ but can sometimes better remember things after seeing them again . . . like certain Signal messages. They pull up a message where he acknowledges one of the open letters Rhodes sent to president Trump.
Has Siekerman read a paragraph from that open letter in which Rhodes predicts a “bloody revolution and civil war.” (*Prediction is not saying you’re going to start it.*)
Trying to get Siekerman to admit that when TRhodes says “we’re going to have to fight a bloody civil war, you’re sayin you are ALL IN?” . . . It appears that way.
Gov now pulls up Parler messages from Siekerman’s account in the days after Nov 2020 election.
Objection . . . overruled . . . Woodward argues . . . <sidebar> . . . overruled
——
Parler messages admitted:
“There is a stop coming patriots. Prepare…get mentally ready…have absolute resolve.”
“…millions of American Patriots have the training, experience and tools to go to war…it will be ugly . . . there will be a cleansing of the freedom tree.”
Gov then gets him to acknowledge “cleansing of the freedom tree” meant he was willing to kill people.
“…possible civil was is not out for he question . . . the possibility is about 80%.”
Gov starts getting him to acknowledge that he was willing to kill other Americans in a cvil war, and badgering with questions about whose side he’d be on, and who he would kill.
“…do not blink . . . if the time come, no hesitation . . . total resolve . . . never ever surrender…”
Again, gov forces him to acknowledge that he’s willing to fight and kill if civil war comes.
“If Biden gets his way with this . . . there will be war.”
Gov badgers him to be specific about when war will come. ‘A couple days, a week, a month…?’
Objections . . . <sidebar>
More slides, and give begins questions asking Siekerman if he ever called DC Police to warn them about the possibility of coming civill war? (Mehta shuts down that lie of questions.)
——
More Patriotic rah-rah messages in which gov is trying to get him to explain basic revolutionary-style words sued by Siekerman. Then tries to get him to define ANTIFA. sis him where ANTIFA’s headquarters are here in DC. (Mehta once again tells gov to move along. Even Mehta knows the gov is badgering this witness.)
“That a Concord Green moment is inevitable.”
Gov asks him if he’s heard Rhodes talk about American Revolution a lot?
Now switches back to Signal chats . . . Discussing his reach-out to DC police about gun regs.
“Did you tell DC police about Stewart Rhodes open letter?” - No
“Did you tell DC Police about the Quick Reaction Force?” - No
Message from Joshua James: “Do you have a farm location for weapons?”
“Not that I’m aware of, but my hotel has secured underground parking . . . “
(Been here . . . done this several times before in this trial. More of same line of questions about his understanding of QRF and DC gun laws.)
——
***WOW . . . Mehta appears to actually be getting impatient with the government, for once.***
***OR . . . does Mehta realize that this badgering of an old guy with sever Long Covid problems is not playing well in front of that jury?***
<sidebar>
***NPR reporter turns to me and says Mehta needs to tell them to stop f-cking badgering an old
Man with COVID.****
Gov moves on to a new exhibit. Woodward stand to openly object to why the exact some line of questioning is happening.
Overruled. More slides admitted . . . of inflammatory language between other OKs . . .
Gov asks why he didn’t turn “evidence of crimes” over to the FBI?
No further questions . . .
——
Woodward begins redirect. Asks Siekerman to describe his use of Parler. He’d never been on social media before, and got caught up on that “kind of BS.” Says he might do it differently if he could.
Woodward asks him about the nature of the political rhetoric and vitriol at the time. Siekerman says it’s probably even worse now.
Woodward takes Siekerman through a series of typical reparative redirect questions.
No further questions . . .
Mehta dismisses jury at 4:48pm . . .
——
Mehta announces that he’d received a letter from McWhirter’s doctor, in which he is recommend not to travel. Nestler wants to do this via a video hearing. Mehta doesn’t know that he can even do this in such a criminal case - but Nestler is quick to infirm that he will provide the necessary use law.
The defense counsel is not in agreement about the process for how to deal with this witness, and Mehta directs them to work it out and come back with recommendations.
Mehta now addresses handwritten notes from defense about witnesses tomorrow, including Mr. Greene . . . in which the FBI has presented only 6-pages of notes on what was a 2-hour interview . . . insinuating the selective nature of how the FBI is presenting the evidence from those interviews.
To accommodate the current disruptions, the defense once again agrees to bring in witnesses out of order. then discussion on estimates on how long each witness will take. (Something Mehta didn’t do a whole lot of during governments case in chief.)
Mehta wants to give the jury an idea of where “timing” stands, by Thursday.
