Hello everyone -
If you never read anything else I've ever write about this trial, read the first portion of this tweetstorm - before the jury is brought in. This is a developing story. It's not over. In conjuction with other investigative reporters, we've been working on this all day and night. More is happening in the morning. Bottom line . . . I witnessed irrefutable judicial corruption this morning. I don't know that anything can be done to turn this around, but Judge Mehta delivered a devasting blow to the defense's case, by purposefully feigining ignorance of one of the significant and higly reported acts of self-sacrfice by Oath Keepers that day, in rescuing 16 Capitol Police officers on January 6th. The witnesses were in the courtroom and ready to testify. Even the PROSECUTION lead attorney had subpeonaed one of those witnesses to testify - for THIS trial - then stood to block the defense bringing him to the stand this morning.
There's more to this story coming. I'll have some of it for you in the morning. Stay tuned . . .
(Typos not fixed. Sorry. No time.)
Day 26 of Oath Keepers Trial - Nov 14
Good morning. We enter week 7 - or week 8, counting jury selection - of the Oath Keepers trial. One can’t say with absolutely certainty, but this will probably be the last week of testimonies. The defense is expected to rest their cases, maybe as early as tomorrow or Wednesday - which seems shockingly fast, considering the government took most of five weeks to present theirs. After that, we have the government’s rebuttal, closing arguments, jury instructions, and then the jury is handed to ball. How much of that can be completed before the Thanksgiving break remains to be seen. I’ve yet to get a straight answer on whether Judge Mehta will give the jury all of Thanksgiving week off, or have them begin deliberations before the break. We’ll probably have a better sense of it from Mehta’s opening comments today, and enquiries about the final number of defense witnesses to be presented before they rest.
——
Judge Mehta takes bench at 9:10am . . .
Government has objection to two witnesses for Meggs. Nestler objects to the those two Oath Keeper witnesses who assisted Capitol Police in other J6 incidents. Claims they are irrelevant because they didn’t have direct contact with the OKs in this trial.
Woodward - for Meggs - opens by reminding the court that NESTLER himself subpoenaed Mike Nichols as a REBUTTAL witness for their case.
Mehta pretends he doesn’t know who Nichols is. (BULLSHIT). Holy shit . . . Mehta is now claiming he cannot understand how these two OKs have “any relevance” Mehta is literally arguing the government’s case for them. Mehta does ask Nestler why HE subpoenaed Nichols, and Nestler gave a rambling response about possibly needing him to testify that he had NO connections to these defendants.
Mehta has asked Woodward to show him the actual video of when Officer Tarik Johnson solicited Mike Nichols and another OK to help him bring trapped USCP officer out of the building. They are now showing the video. (Of course, the jury is not seeing this.)
How in the AF can Mehta himself be openly arguing against the relevance of this witness and video when the government was allowed to bring in a Safeway district manager to show how much money they lost on J6 and J7?!? (My blood is boiling right now.)
We knew this moment was coming . . . but I can’t believe that it has been Mehta himself arguing against the relevance of the witness, rather than Nestler. (The video is still playing.)
——
After watching the video, Mehta begins by saying the organization of the OKs is not on trial in this case. Says Nichols is not a charged co-conspirator in this case. Says Nichols is standing at least “10-15” feet away from other OKs, therefore it can’t be construed that he was with the other OKs. Mehta says just because Nichols helped Capitol Police, he was not part of the group on trial, and there is therefore no “probative” value in showing this witness and video to the jury.
Woodward continues to argue the relevance, but Mehta seems to have his mind made up. He says Nichols “conduct that day” says nothing about the “conduct of anyone else.”
——
Mehta agrees with the government’s objection to these two witnesses. “That’s it. I have ruled.”
Sorry. This is a f-cking outrage. The fix is in. Mehta has totally revealed himself now as an agent of a “predetermined” conviction of these defendants.
Given the amount of immaterial and prejudicial witnesses and video the government was allowed to present . . . I have just witnessed pure f-cking evil in this courtroom.
——
Because Woodward/Meggs’ witnesses have been shot down by Mehta, Fischer - for Caldwell - will present one of their witnesses, first, while Woodward regroups.
Jury seated at 9:48am. Fischer - for Caldwell - calls John Roper to the stand. Retired LEO from NC. Also joined the OKs in summer of 2020, when he became concerned about the ability of local LEOs to meet the needs of his community in the face of all the violence taking place that year.
Roper testifies that he was part of the group of NC OKs who decided to separate from the national organizations, but did in fact join a large bus group that travelled to DC on J6 . . . upon which he estimates about 10-15 OKs were on that bus.
Roper testifies to knowing about and being in connection with the NC QRF which was also located in VA. Describes how that QRF was given specific instructions not to bring weapons into the District.
He also marched from the Ellipse to the Capitol after the rally. He testifies that that Doug Smith (NC OK leader) at one point told the group not to go any further forward. Because he couldn’t distinguish the difference between what was “Capitol” property or not, he never got off the grassy area and approached the west side paved areas where the inaugural scaffolding was set up.
——
He arrived at 2:15pm, and at that time he could see no violent interactions with police. Several thousand people were gathered in that area. Eventually, because the wind was so strong, he could smell the ‘pepper spray’ in the area, but could not see where it was coming from. Because of the cold and wind, and the fact he appeared to have become separated from the other OKs he was with, he made his way back to their bus by about 4pm.
It wasn’t until after getting back to the bus that he became aware of the violence that took place at the Capitol.
He did submit to an FBI interview in June of 2021, but has never been charged with a crime. He describes that because of his status as a retired LEO, he continues to have a legal privilege to carry a firearm in DC, and in fact did so that day in DC, as he is still “LEOSA" certified.
Roper closes with stating that he served with and retired from 27 years as an FBI agent.
No further questions . . .
——
Gov begins cross . . . first brings up a disciplinary action while in the FBI back in 1995. (Misuse of position.)
Asked how many people in his OK group wanted to travel with their own firearms to the “DC area of VA.” He doesn’t know.
Gov now shows OK Chat messages that Roper participated in. He confirms that his doesn’t believe in the conspiracy theories of Q-anon, or that it was impossible for him to confirm what he was responding to in a single chat thread, when Gov is only showing one message, and then his single response some hour later. Further, his response only had to to with the his opinion of corporate media bias - which stands by.
Gov atty Hughes really has nothing to say other than to badger him with about questions about what other’s might have intentions to do with their guns. Who wanted to bring guns. Those who did take them to VA. Things he knows nothing about.
Then, pressing him about his statement of not knowing about violence until he returned to the bus and could get WiFi signal.
Now being asked if was part of the DC OP Signal chat. (yes.) Hughes shows him a message from Meggs on J6, which he says he never saw. Then the shows him an OK Signal message from Nov. of 2020, calling for their “most highly trained soldiers” to come forward. He says he never saw that message, or considered himself as highly trained soldier.
No further questions…
——
Redirect by Fischer, begins by clarifying that Roper retired from his 27 years with the FBI “in good standing.” Clarifies that he wasn’t aware of any OK plans to attack the Capitol, interfere with the election, invade the Capitol, etc.
No further questions . . . Roper is dismissed . . . and we wait for the next witness.
***NOTE: my blood pressure is still through the roof.***
Fischer calls Joseph Godbold(sp?) . . . operational supervisor for HOA. Knows Caldwell, lives about 9.5 miles from Caldwell’s farm, and did a lot of work for Caldwell when his own job was affected by COVID lockdowns.
A lot of discussions about Caldwell’s frail health and inability to help with the more physical parts of the work he was doing work for Caldwell, whether at his own property at other’s where he worked for Caldwell.
Gov. objections (twice) about “relevance” are overruled by Mehta. (Awww . . . Thank you kind judge for those little bones . . . after blowing up Meggs’ witnesses this morning.)
Godbold never witnessed Caldwell holding any militia training ops on his property.
——
“What did you notice about the license plate on Caldwell’s vehicle.?”
“OBJECTION! Relevance.”
Mehta: “I’ll allow it.”
“He had a ‘disabled veteran’ license plate.”
——
Fischer begins to ask about his own family’s history in the military and service at the Capitol. Also answers questions about the “shit talking” they did about the election results and such, with Caldwell and family.
Two more objections. Mehta continues to overrule. (He hasn’t sided with defense on this many straight objections EVER, during this entire trial. He is obviously “showing forth his fairness” after the dastardly ruling he made before the jury was seated.)
No more questions . . . Manzo takes over cross for Gov.
Manzo immediately begins presenting a series of FB chats and other messages which he sarcastically describes Godbold just using typical “locker room talk” - just “spouting off” like any American. (Godbold had his FB account suspended at some point.)
More chats presented of inflammatory private message chats of he and others bitching about election results, Pence not doing his job, Trump needing to declare “martial” law. (“Do you know what martial law is?” “I probably couldn’t accurately define it.”)
More chat messages, including ones Godbold received from Caldwell on the day of J6, including one in which his own father responded that they need to “gas” all the members of congress while they were in the tunnel.
Manzo is allowed to ask Godbold a long series of questions about “his” activities on J6 . . . HE WASN’T THERE . . . but all the questions were about Caldwell’s alleged activities that day, related to the QRF, moving weapons, shit talking claims he made, etc.
Fischer returns for redirect and has Godbold clarify that he still believes he has a first amendment right to al those “typical American” things he was saying and sharing online.
Mehta announces morning break at 10:58am . . .
——
Jury reseated at 11:24am
Fischer calls Sharon Caldwell to the stand. (Thomas Caldwells wife.) They have known each for 24 years. She has an MBA Not currently employed. Their farm in Berryville, VA - in the Shenandoah Valley.
He currently uses a cane because he had hip replacement surgery early this year. He used a cane periodically before his surgery. Hasn’t been able to do his physical therapy due to this trial and trial prep. He has other back problems, including multiple back surgeries, shoulder surgery, etc. She describes his multiple injuries, surgeries, and health problems, including surgery before J6 which he was still recovering from.
Describes examples of farm chores he used to be able to do, before his physical disabilities became to great.
***NOTE . . . Mrs. Caldwell is asked a long series of questions about their farm, the interactions they had with OKs when they camped on their property. Lot’s of images shown. Etc. Etc. Etc. I’m having a great deal of trouble concentrating . . . A) my blood is still boiling over Mehta’s early ruling against Mike Nichols as a witness for Mr. Meggs, and . . . B) I’m answering questions from other journalists (not here at the trial) about that ruling this morning. I won’t let anything of importance from Mrs. Caldwells’ testimony slip by . . . but I expect the fireworks will come when she is cross examined.***
<I posted a copy of Nester’s subpoena of Mike Nichols to this trial>
——
Fischer takes Mrs. Caldwell through a long series of questions about their participation in other rallies in DC, how they first became acquainted with other OKs, Rhodes, (at local VA rally), etc. They’re plans to attend the Million MAGA March, BBQs on their farm with OKs and others.
Long series of questions about her own familiarity with firearms, her CCW permit, why she carries a weapon for self-defense. Hunting, and other typical uses of firearms needs living on a farm. She mentions they had as many as 70 firearms in their guns safes on the day Caldwell was arrested, and that the FBI confiscated none of them.
Goes into his interactions with OKs in helping them navigate their way around DC, and then a long series of questions about the couples’ use of the word “recce”, what it means to them, and how it was used in his “recce” of DC before J6 to find the location of porta-potties.
Eventually Fischer takes Mrs. Caldwell through a long series of questions, images and videos of their actual activities on J6, including the fact they never did any violence, property damage, or entered the Capitol building. When he finally gets to the point of having her explain she of those more inflammatory message chats Mr. Caldwell sent on J6 - in which he took credit for activities he didn’t actually do - the government OBJECTS, and Mehta calls a long SIDEBAR. When they came out of the sidebar, Fischer went to a different line of questions, about their post-J6 activities. Mehta once again sided with the government . . . even though we KNOW they are going to go into the bravado language when they get their shot at her. (Who wants that bet?)
Gov is aggressive in their objections during her testimony, and wins most often.
——
Mehta dismisses jury for lunch at 12:45pm . . . and then asks to hear a phone call recording between the Caldwells and Crowl, Watkins about coming to their farm in November. Government opposes the recording being played to jury as “hearsay.” Defense believes it shows state-of-mind. Mehta doesn’t believe it’s hearsay, but does grant government request for limine instructions to jury.
Lunch break for everyone else begins at 12:52 . . .
——
https://news.yahoo.com/cop-put-maga-hat-save-150935982.html
——
Mehta back on the stand at 1:46pm . . .
Lee Bright - for Rhodes - requests access to his personal cell phone to access a certain message he believes is helpful to the defense. The prosecution obviously objects, and says they have had the raw extractions to the phone’s and other opportunities to look through that one for evidence. Mehta says he is “Disinclined” to order the government to give Rhodes access to the phone, “mid-trial.”
Geyer - for Harrelson - approaches to explain he’d hoped the testimony of Mike Nichols had been allowed admission, and that there is other evidence of other indicted OKs who also assisted LEOs in and out of the building, and that under the rule of completeness Nichols testimony shows the entire context of the Oath Keepers mission that day. (Mehta puts it off for further discussion after 5pm.)
Haller - for Meggs - approaches ask says that due to Nichols’ testimony being denied, there are two exhibits they wishes to bring in during his testimony, and she’d therefore want to call Rhodes back to the stand, to enter those exhibits through him. (Didn’t hear Mehta’s ruling on the request.)
——
Jury back in at 1:59pm . . . Fischer resumes his direct of Mrs. Caldwell. He begins asking her about a recorded call between her and her husband made in November that they have been able to acquire through discovery. (They play the call back, but it is mostly inaudible here in the media room.) We do know the contents had something to do with why Crowl and Watkins were coming to visit them on J14 . . . something to do with their being harassed by media and Antifa after images and video of their presence at Capitol had been all over the news.
Fischer begins showing her photos of the inaugural staging area, and asking her if she can see assaults on police officers from her position . . . “No.”
Fischer then asks her about the morning the FBI arrested Mr. Caldwell. 6am, still dark. She had a hard time waking him up, because sleeps with a CPAP machine. They were calling him by name over bullhorn , and about to use a battering ram by the time he got to the door.
In an attempt to show some images . . . Objection . . . <sidebar> . . . Fischer returns to ask question about the electronic devices they seized. (Obviously those photos were not allowed.)
<another sidebar>
——
Then a discussion about attending at rally in November in which the speaker was encouraging people to get off Facebook, because FB had been banning and deleting Trump supporters and GOP activist pages. She says, “Yes,” we are Republicans. One of the DC rally organizers had their page deleted, with over 300,000 followers.
Fischer is having her identify a series of images of files from their seized computer, which he wishes to bring into evidence . . . objection . . . <another sidebar> Images were admitted - but Mehta give a limine instruction to jury.
They show the court of series of family photos and other non-J6 related photos that had been taken down by FB.
Verifying that she had retried from her job on J4 of ’21, and had given noticed to her employer in early Dec. of 2020.
Now showing video of Tom Caldwell from hotel CCTV in which he rest agains the wall, indicating his frail condition.
“Did you or husband storm the Capitol on J6?” . . . NO.
“Did you or husband steal a police shield on J6?” . . . NO.
More questions about Tom’s inflammatory language on the 6th . . . “that just Tom joking around.”
“Tom’s hobby?” . . . screenwriting - writing in general - since the 80s.
“Did you witness in conduct by your husband in which he tried to stop or interfere with the election on J6?” . . . NO
No further questions . . . no defense gross.
——
Manzo begins cross for government . . . immediately begins asking her inflammatory about chats from both her husband and other OKs . . . she denies her awareness of those. Some of the questions implicate Caldwell in wronging. She denies her husband did any of those things. Mano asks if she deleted chats or unsent FB messages, (No)
Manzo tries to get her acknowledge Tom had deleted messages. She says she was not aware at the time. She disputes some message deletion dates, as not being after J6, but back in December, when they were getting ready to get off FB.
Manzo shows video of early morning on J6 (still dark). She agrees she was there t the rally early with her husband and other OKs. Someone gave her and Tom OK t-shirts early that morning, which they put on. (Tom was never a member of the OKs.)
Now showing video of their march from rally toward Capitol, with her chanting “Stop the Steal.” Manzo asks her if she new the certification of the election was happening that day. (Yes) He tries to get her to describe the legal process.
He quotes Tom as saying, “Pence better get off his Punk Ass and do what’s right.” She says they wee just having good time. They were new to the “protesting thing.” Manzo tries to press her to defend or describe Tom’s inflammatory language. She said, “That’s just Tom being Tom, mostly joking around.”
——
When they arrived at the Capitol, she denies being aware of any violence taking place, and they never saw barriers by the time they arrived. She smelled no tear gas where she was. She assumed by the time they arrived that Congress has already completed the certification of the election.
She explains they pressed forward toward the inaugural stage because she could see so many people were already upon the stage and balconies. From what she could see, it was a peaceful gathering, and they continued moving forward. no barricades, no barriers, no police, until they eventually made it to the top of the stairs.
She shown a photo Tom took with the canvass torn on scaffolding. “You thought this was normal behavior?” . . . NO.
“Did you ever consider the police might have been driven into the building by rioters?” . . . I NEVER CONSIDERED THAT AT THE TIME.
Manzo shows more photos of people climbing through inauguration scaffolding, but she explains that be the time they got there the violence was over, and she was unaware of the previous riot. Once they reach the upper level, she explains her perception of things began to change, and she’d heard the Capitol had been breached and that someone might have been shot. She said she prayed that was not true.
Manzo asks why she prayed that? Because you abhor political violence? Then he plays a video of her talking about “WE” going through tear gas. She said that’s not “her” but the generic “WE,” We the People. Manzo shows her messages of them talking about tear gas, rubber bullets.
——
Manzo presses her to admit they were having fun in the midst of the knowledge of violence - either before they arrived, or in their presence. She tries to defend the “vibe” of the moment in which they were documenting. Quick back and forth disagreement between she and Manzo, and Mehta warns them about being argumentative.
She begins defending her right to express how she felt in the moment and her disappointments in the political process as foundational to her freedom of speech. (Manzo starts retreading and Mehta tells him to move along.)
Manzo has trouble pulling up video evidence, and asks the judge if can they take the afternoon break. Mehta releases jury and witness at 3:07.
——
Mehta then asks Manzo how much linger the cross will be, and then about more of Fischer’s witnesses.
Geyer comes forward to ask Mehta to reconsider his ruling against Nichols testimony, as it relates to state of mind and rule of completeness. Mehta reiterates his position that the Nichols video is is irrelevant to the defendants in this case. Geyer argues that the government has already showed video in which they had edited out moments when other OK defendants were in fact part of helping officers out of the Capitol, and that the Nichols video bolstered the coverall state of mind and sense of mission that all the OKs felt. Mehta still disagrees, but tells Geyer if he wishes to show the more complete video the government had presented an edited version of us, he woulds be happy to take a look at that.
(Way to go, Geyer. Keep pushing.)
Government now wants a limine instruction that the jury should not infer that his use of opioid painkillers on J6 and that evening was an explanation for his mental state and inflammatory comments that day. Mehta feels there is no basis for him to make that instruction, but then the government asks the judge to prevent Fischer from using Caldwells use of painkillers and alcohol in his closing argument as a means of explaining his verbal diarrhea. Mehta says, “let me think about it,” and leaves for break.
——
Mehta back on bench at 3:32, and tells the attorneys he wishes to have a conversation with jury to about schedule and other questions they have.
Mrs. Caldwell is back on stand and jury reseated at 3:34pm . . .
Manzo shows a video of Caldwell climbing over a short wall in order to get through crowd to leave Capitol area. Then another video of Caldwell walking “normally” in the hotel after a long day walking around DC.
Manzo now goes back to the texts and messages where Tom Caldwell was bragging about “storming the capitol.” She responses, again, that being that there is no evidence they actually did those things, it was just braggadocios comments. He continues to show more and more message slides, forcing her to either explain or deny in each case that they never did those things. (Like . . . “We fought out way up.”)
Manzo concludes with a video in the hotel where Watkins and Crowl salute Mr. Caldwell. She, “That’s what veterans do.”
——
No further questions . . . Fischer begins redirect . . . with a series of other messages and photos of their Capitol grounds where from their perspective they could see no violence. She explains she heard about “someone being shot” from people in the crowd.
“Was you husband ever an OK?” . . . No.
“Did your husband ever command the OKs?” . . . No.
“Did your husband ever lead OKs into the Capitol” . . . No.
(A series of these types of questions . . . All “No.”)
“Did you or your husband ever assault the Capitol? . . . No.”
No further questions . . . <sidebar>
——-
Mehta announces to the jury that this the end of presentation of evidence, and that he needs to speak with attorneys about plans and schedules, then he will come back to speak with them with “hopefully good news.”
Jury dismissed . . .
Fischer says that if Mr. Caldwell declines to testify, they will “rest.”
Crisp comes forward with his plan . . . couldn’t hear.
Geyer rises from back of room, and we can’t hear him - but Mehta says it looks like the defense will conclude tomorrow, and begin closing arguments on Wednesday. (Wow.) Then there is talk about the Thanksgiving break. Mehta know others may have already made plans for next week, but he’s like the jury to use the first two days of the week for deliberations.
Mehta departs to talk to jury, and say he’ll be back in about 15 minutes.
——
Mehta returns to bench at 4:14pm . . .
The jury is available if all-day Friday is required to complete closings. He wants the jury to begin deliberations on Monday and Tuesday. Jury may actually get the case as early as Friday.
There’s the issue of Juror 16 who is moving to Houston. They will not let her know that she will be excused until deliberations begin. But . . . #7 moves up in the line-up. Everyone is onboard with jury situation.
More discussions of trying to nail down expected schedule this week. Seems highly likely closing arguments will begin on Wednesday.
More debate about remaining rulings on motions and disputed exhibits.
——
With regards to the government’s desire to include a letter from the IRS about Rhodes’ failure to file tax returns for a number of years, Mehta begins reviewing a number of Circuit Court precedents in which they are admissible . . . BUT . . . because he had sustained defense objection earlier, he feels it puts him in a box, having previously prevented the evidence during cross examination. (Will get back to this one.)
As to jury instructions . . . some remaining wrangling over the final definition of “seditious conspiracy.” Skipping to the punch line, Mehta prefers the Webster’s Dictionary definition over Black’s Law Dictionary’s definition. Final language is basically decided, and is in the draft sent to all party’s.
Court dismissed at 4:57pm
