Search This Blog

Friday, October 21, 2022

 
PROGRESSIVES MEANING AND WORD ORIGIN FOR THE TERM SMARM
COMPILATION AND COMMENTARY
BY LUCY WARNER
OCTOBER 21, 2022
 
URBAN DICTIONARY HAS OUTDONE MERRIAM WEBSTER ON PROVIDING A GENUINE DEFINITION AND WORD DERIVATION FOR A SOMETIMES USED, BUT NEVER EXPLAINED TERM, "SMARM" OR SMARMY. WHILE IT CLEARLY IS A CONCEPT OF UNDESIRABLE MEANING, I HAVE LOOKED SMARM UP HALF A DOZEN TIMES AND NOT FOUND ANYTHING SPECIFIC OR EVEN VERY USEFUL. TODAY I HAD BETTER LUCK.
 
HERE IS WHAT MERRIAM WEBSTER SAID:  
 
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/smarm  
smarm noun
\ ˈsmärm  \
Definition of smarm
: smarmy language or behavior
 
Examples of smarm in a Sentence
Recent Examples on the Web
* Fletch is also now embodied by a wisecracking Jon Hamm — also miscast (Bob Odenkirk would make a great Fletch) — who leans more naturally into the one-liners than Chase while exuding his usual mix of smarm and charm.
— Odie Henderson, BostonGlobe.com, 14 Sep. 2022
* Scott Michael Foster plays him with all of the smarm but none of the charm of Nathaniel from Crazy Ex-Girlfriend.
— Sara Netzley, EW.com, 15 Oct. 2021
* Cirk is a college dropout who’s become fixated on killing John Gordo (Willem Dafoe, dripping menacing smarm), the major turned private contractor who trained his father, and who trained William, at Abu Ghraib.
— Alison Willmore, Vulture, 2 Sep. 2021
 
 
MERRIAM-WEBSTER'S THESAURUS DID GIVE MORE INFORMATION, BUT A LIST OF COMPARABLE WORDS IS STILL NOT A DEFINITION. THE SYNONYMS WERE:
 
Thesaurus
smarm noun
 
Synonyms & Antonyms of smarm
 
cajolement, cajolery, ingratiation, fawning, sycophancy, toadying, acclaim, applause, commendation, praise, adoration, idolatry, worship, caresses, compliments, congratulations, felicitations, greetings, regards, respects, allurements, blandishments, endearments, adulation, blarney, butter, flannel [British], flattery, incense, overpraise, soft soap, sweet talk, taffy
 
Antonyms & Near Antonyms for smarm
bad-mouthing, belittlement, depreciation, detraction, disparagement, put-down
 
 
BUT COLLINS, URBAN DICTIONARY AND WIKTIONARY ALL DID MORE RESEARCH THAN MY STANDBY M-W. BOTH CAME UP WITH HELPFUL COMMENTS, WHICH THOUGH THEY ARE SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT FROM EACH OTHER, DO ACCORD IN MEANING.
 
https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/smarm   
in British English
(smɑːm IPA Pronunciation Guide) British informal
 
VERB
1. (transitive; often foll by down)
to flatten (the hair, etc) with cream or grease
2. (when intr, foll by up to)
to ingratiate oneself (with)
 
NOUN
3.  obsequious flattery
Collins English Dictionary. Copyright © HarperCollins Publishers
 
Word origin
C19: of unknown origin
 
 
THE HAIR GREASE CONNECTION, WHICH MAY CONTAIN AN IMPLIED INSULT AGAINST INDIANS
 
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Smarm  
Smarm   
 
Smarm was the name given to a particularly heavy and cloying hair grease worn by Indian men in the nineteenth century. Thus a "smarmy" person is cloying, over-ingratiating, oleaginous ("oily"), close, and over-familiar.
.
"Who was that man who pretended to know you so well?"
 
"Oh, Kenneth. Ignore him. He confuses charm with smarm."
by al-in-chgo March 25, 2010
 
 
FIRST PUBLICATION
 
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/smarmy#:~:text=Etymology,published%20on%2014%20January%201899
Etymology
 
smarm +‎ -y[en 1] Apparently coined by "B.R.L., of Brighton" with sense "saying treacly things which do not sound genuine" in a competition for neologisms in The Academy (London) published on 14 January 1899.[en 2]
 
Adjective
smarmy (comparative smarmier, superlative smarmiest)
 
* Falsely earnest, smug, ingratiating, or pious.
a smarmy salesman with a big smile
* (rare, dated) unctuous, greasy, as hair from pomade
*Synonyms
(falsely earnest or smug): flattering, gushing, ingratiating, oily, smug
 
 
BUT TO DIG AN EVEN DEEPER HOLE, CAN WE CARRY THIS FURTHER BACK IN TIME? THIS LEADS TO THE OCCURRENCE OF THE WORD "SMARM" AS PART OF A "SUTRA" IN HINDU WISDOM LITERATURE, PERHAPS AS EARLY AS 500 BC. IN THIS CASE THE TERM, TRANSLATING TO "THREAD," APPEARS TO GO BACK TO LOOM WEAVING, AND HAS NO NEGATIVE CONNOTATION, NOR ANY RELATIONSHIP TO OIL. READ THIS EXCERPT.
 
https://www.exoticindiaart.com/book/details/ritual-sutras-history-of-indian-literature-volume-1-fasc-2-nbz817/  
A History of Indian Literature
By Jan Gonda
 
"…. 1. The literature
In the later Vedic period the scholarly literature developed a new prose style, generally known as sautra style. The term sutra, for want of something better often translated by "aphorism", denotes, generally speaking, a large and varied number of "manuals of instruction"! and "systematic surveys or resume" . . . . The result generally consisted of long successions of short phrases which in many cases impress a modern reader as a sort of classified index of the subjects dealt with rather than a manual. Although a good many of them are grammatically complete and logically impeccable individual smarms can hardly be disconnected from their context because they correlate to the sutras which precede . . . . The name smarm (literally "thread"), which is applicable to' both the whole work and its individual sentences or paragraphs, has been variously explained, but there can be no doubt that it is taken from the image of weaving and of woven material made out of threads. A thread stretched out lengthwise as a warp to be crossed by the woof may continue-then sutra becomes a name for the whole work-or it may be cut on both sides of the frame-then smarm denotes the single paragraphs."
 
 
THE THREAD OR DISCOURSE IN SUTRA STORIES  
 
https://tzuchi.us/blog/the-wisdom-in-sutra-stories   
 
The discourses of Shakyamuni Buddha – given starting from the time he attained enlightenment until his death – were initially passed down orally by his closest disciples and monastic followers. They were later recorded in manuscripts written in Pali and then in Sanskrit, both liturgical languages native to ancient India. As Buddhism spread, these texts were translated into Chinese and Tibetan, and eventually other languages as well. 
 
This canonical literature is referred to by the Sanskrit term sūtra (Pali: sutta), which can be translated as “discourse” yet also encompasses “string” or “thread” in its meaning. Buddhist sutras typically begin with the phrase “Thus I have heard” as they are generally considered to be buddhavacana, meaning “word of the Buddha” (Sanskrit; Pali), and  many are in the form of stories, within which core principles, rules, or aphorisms are woven in and “strung” together.
 
 
SUTRA DEFINITIONS
 
https://www.thefreedictionary.com/Sutras   
sutra (redirected from Sutras)
 
su·tra  (so͞o′trə)
n.
1. Hinduism Any of various aphoristic doctrinal summaries produced for memorization generally between 500 and 200 bc and later incorporated into Hindu literature.
2. also sut·ta (so͝ot′ə) Buddhism A scriptural narrative, especially a text traditionally regarded as a discourse of the Buddha.
[Sanskrit sūtram, thread, sutra; see syū- in Indo-European roots.]
FROM:
American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fifth Edition. Copyright © 2016 by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company. All rights reserved.
 
sutra (ˈsuːtrə)
n
1. (Hinduism) Hinduism Sanskrit sayings or collections of sayings on Vedic doctrine dating from about 200 ad onwards
2. (Hinduism) (modifier) Hinduism
a. of or relating to the last of the Vedic literary periods, from about 500 to 100 bc: the sutra period.
b. of or relating to the sutras or compilations of sutras of about 200 ad onwards
3. (Buddhism) Buddhism collections of dialogues and discourses of classic Mahayana Buddhism dating from the 2nd to the 6th centuries ad
[C19: from Sanskrit: list of rules]
FROM:
Collins English Dictionary – Complete and Unabridged, 12th Edition 2014 © HarperCollins Publishers 1991, 1994, 1998, 2000, 2003, 2006, 2007, 2009, 2011, 2014
 
HERE ENDS THIS THREAD.
 

Saturday, October 15, 2022

 
 
PROGRESSIVES HISTORY THE ATTEMPTED OVERTHROW OF THE US GOVERNMENT THAT ALMOST SUCCEEDED JANUARY 6 2021
COMPILATION AND COMMENTARY
BY LUCY MANESS WARNER
OCTOBER 15, 2022
 
IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THERE CAN BE NO RATIONAL OR HONEST DOUBT REMAINING ABOUT CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT REBELLION OR INSURRECTION CHARGES IF THEY ARE BROUGHT AGAINST THE PROUD BOYS. WILL THEY BE BROUGHT AGAINST TRUMP? I THINK SOME CHARGES OF A SERIOUS NATURE WILL COME TO HIM, IF NOT THIS ONE.
 
SEE THE ARTICLE FROM CSIS.ORG BELOW AND THE WASHINGTON POST STORY, PLUS THE TWO ITEMS FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE. ALL CONTAIN IMPORTANT MATERIAL.  
 
 
INSURRECTION VS SEDITION
 
https://www.csis.org/analysis/understanding-insurrection-and-sedition
CENTER FOR STRATEGIC AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
 
PHOTOGRAPH – [HEAVILY DAMAGED DOORS TO THE CAPITOL SHOWN FROM INSIDE]. Photo: Alex Wong/Getty Images
 
CRITICAL QUESTIONS
 
Understanding Insurrection and Sedition
January 29, 2021
 
In response to the January 6 siege on the U.S. Capitol, the Joint Chiefs of Staff penned a letter denouncing the rioters’ behavior and emphasizing that the “rights of freedom of speech and assembly do not give anyone the right to resort to violence, sedition and insurrection.” This analysis defines acts of sedition and insurrection and evaluates the seriousness of both charges.
 
Q1: What is “sedition” and “insurrection”?
 
A1: Generally, sedition is conduct or speech that incites individuals to violently rebel against the authority of the government. Insurrection includes the actual acts of violence and rebellion. In a monarchy, sedition might refer to actions instigating the removal of a king or queen. In a constitutional democracy, sedition and insurrection refer to inciting or participating in rebellion against the constitutionally established government, its processes and institutions, or the rule of law. In other words, in the United States’ democracy, violently overthrowing the government or its institutions is overthrowing the Constitution itself. One cannot commit sedition or insurrection to “overthrow a government” while still claiming to uphold and defend the Constitution. The U.S. government, the rule of law, and the Constitution are inextricably linked, and violent attacks on any of the three are not protected actions.
 
Q2: Is it a federal crime to commit “sedition” and “insurrection”?
 
A2: It is a serious federal crime to commit seditious conspiracy or to participate in an insurrection against the government.
 
Under 18 U.S.C. § 2384, “seditious conspiracy” occurs when two or more persons:
 
conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof.
 
Individuals charged with seditious conspiracy can be fined and could serve up to 20 years in prison.
 
It is important to consider that federal law refers to “seditious conspiracy” as opposed to just “sedition.” There is the added burden of proof that an individual must actively be conspiring and taking steps toward a violent action against the government, not just making comments that seem to merely reflect that desire. This is to ensure that First Amendment activity is protected under the Constitution, and only actions that overtly demonstrate individuals’ plans to take dangerous steps toward overthrowing the United States’ constitutional government are charged.
 
But those that serve in the military and have taken an oath to protect and defend the Constitution are held to a higher standard. Under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, individuals intending on overthrowing or destroying a “lawful civil authority” can be charged under 10 U.S.C. §894. Moreover, members of the military can be charged under this provision for failing to do their “utmost to prevent and suppress” these activities from taking place.
 
Insurrection is captured by 18 U.S.C. § 2383 and applies to “[w]hoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the law there, or gives aid or comfort thereto.” Charges of insurrection, or the incitement of insurrection, involves fines and imprisonment of up to 10 years. Individuals charged with insurrection are also ineligible to hold public office in the United States.
 
Q3: How is this different from expressing opposition to policy?
 
A3: There is a clear distinction between actions aimed at responsibly holding institutions accountable through constitutional means—actions that are routinely part of and encouraged in a strong democracy—and violence aimed at undermining the proper functioning and accessibility of democracy for all citizens. Protest and dissent are comprehensively protected under the First Amendment. However, acts of sedition, seditious conspiracy, and insurrection actively damage the United States’ system of government with the ultimate consequence of depriving other citizens an equal opportunity to participate in democracy and affect responsible change.
 
Freedom of speech in nearly all forms is an essential part of U.S. democracy. But to maintain these freedoms, we need to protect and preserve the Constitution, and the institutions that it establishes, not because they are perfect, but because they are capable of change through peaceful means. All Americans should take seriously the admonition that ours is a government “of, by, and for the people” and learn to be effective agents of change under the Constitution rather than succumb to the mistaken claim that overthrowing the constitutional system is the answer.
 
Q4: Why is a sedition charge or an insurrection charge so serious?
 
A4: Sedition and insurrection charges are serious because they go to the very heart of U.S. constitutional democracy and the fundamental value of respect for the rule of law that distinguishes the United States from totalitarian regimes.
 
Over the course of U.S. history, these terms have been utilized to find fault with individuals who were merely being critical of the government or a particular party. However, as the nation matured, the U.S. public developed an almost sacred understanding that dissent, and even hyperbolic conspiracy and seemingly violent rhetoric, can be largely tolerated under the Constitution.
 
But there is a reason that many are confident that individuals involved in the riot at the Capitol will be charged on seditious conspiracy, and potentially even insurrection. The violent threats leading up to January 6, the actions taken at the Capitol, and the continued incitement of attacks on state and federal governments demonstrate a persistent and determined assault on U.S. democracy. The charges are serious and unprecedented, but so too are the violent actions that took place.
 
Suzanne Spaulding is senior adviser for homeland security and director of the Defending Democratic Institutions project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in Washington, D.C. Joseph Federici is an associate director and associate fellow with the CSIS International Security Program. Devi Nair is a program manager and research associate with the CSIS International Security Program.
 
Critical Questions is produced by the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), a private, tax-exempt institution focusing on international public policy issues. Its research is nonpartisan and nonproprietary. CSIS does not take specific policy positions. Accordingly, all views, positions, and conclusions expressed in this publication should be understood to be solely those of the author(s).
 
© 2021 by the Center for Strategic and International Studies. All rights reserved.
 
WRITTEN BY
 
Suzanne Spaulding
Senior Adviser, Homeland Security, International Security Program
 
Devi Nair
Associate Director and Associate Fellow, International Security Program
Joseph Federici
MEDIA QUERIES
Contact H. Andrew Schwartz
Chief Communications Officer
Tel: 202.775.3242
 
Contact Paige Montfort
Media Relations Coordinator, External Relations
Tel: 202.775.3173
RELATED
Commentaries, Critical Questions, and Newsletters, Counterterrorism and Homeland Security, Defending Democratic Institutions, Defense and Security, International Security Program
 
 
PROUD BOY DOES A SOMERSAULT  
 
ONE OF THE "MINISTRY OF SELF DEFENSE" PROUD BOY ELITE CHAPTER HAS PLED GUILTY TO A CHARGE OF SEDITIOUS CONSPIRACY. WHO WILL BE NEXT, AND WHAT NEW INFORMATION WILL BE LEARNED FROM THEM?
 
https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2022/10/06/proud-boys-bertino-plea-seditious-conspiracy/
LEGAL ISSUES
First Proud Boys leader pleads guilty to Jan. 6 seditious conspiracy
Jeremy Bertino was part of the right-wing group’s inner circle and accused of planning violence to stop the Joe Biden presidency
Image without a caption
By Spencer S. Hsu
Updated October 6, 2022 at 6:32 p.m. EDT|Published October 6, 2022 at 3:15 p.m. EDT
 
PHOTOGRAPH -- Proud Boy Jeremy Bertino at a Richmond rally in January 2020. (Anthony Crider)
 
A lieutenant of longtime former Proud Boys chairman Henry “Enrique” Tarrio became the group’s first member to plead guilty to seditious conspiracy in the Jan. 6 Capitol riot on Thursday, deepening the government’s case against an organization accused of mobilizing violence to prevent the inauguration of Joe Biden.
 
Jeremy Bertino, 43, of Belmont, N.C., agreed to cooperate with the Justice Department against Tarrio and four other Proud Boys leaders with ties to influential Donald Trump supporters Roger Stone and Alex Jones. The Proud Boys defendants are set to face trial in December on charges including plotting to oppose by force the presidential transition, culminating in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol.
 
At a hearing before U.S. District Judge Timothy J. Kelly in Washington, Bertino pleaded guilty to that count and to one count of illegal possession of firearms as a former felon, punishable by 51 to 63 months in prison at sentencing under advisory federal guidelines, prosecutors said.
 
In a sign of the sensitivity and potential importance of Bertino’s testimony, prosecutors agreed that in exchange for “substantial cooperation,” they could seek leniency at sentencing and enter Bertino into a Justice Department witness protection program.
 
In plea papers, Bertino said Proud Boys leaders “agreed that the election had been stolen, that the purpose of traveling to Washington, D.C., on January 6, 2021, was to stop the certification of the Electoral College vote, and that the [Ministry of Self Defense*] leaders were willing to do whatever it would take, including using force against police and others, to achieve that objective.”
 
He admitted that at least two days earlier he received encrypted chat messages indicating that members of the Proud Boys leadership group who called themselves the Ministry of Self Defense “believed that storming the Capitol would achieve the group’s goal” and would require using violence.
 
PHOTOGRAPH -- Bertino, carrying bullhorn, attends a rally at Freedom Plaza in D.C. on Dec. 12, 2020. (Luis M. Alvarez/AP)
 
Bertino had a place in the inner circle of Proud Boys leaders accused of conspiring to impede Congress with angry Trump supporters as lawmakers met to certify the election results. Bertino’s home in North Carolina was searched in March at the same time that Tarrio was arrested on charges that he and at least the four others “directed, mobilized and led” a crowd of 200 to 300 supporters onto Capitol grounds. Many in that crowd are accused of leading some of the earliest and most aggressive attacks on police and property.
 
At the time of the search, Bertino allegedly possessed two pistols, a shotgun, a bolt-action rifle and two semiautomatic AR-15-style rifles with scopes. Bertino was convicted in 2004 of first-degree reckless endangerment in New York state, a felony, and sentenced to five years of probation with a period of local jail time, according to court filings.
 
Bertino’s testimony could implicate Tarrio, a former aide to GOP strategist Stone, and co-defendant Joe Biggs, a former employee of Jones’s online Infowars show. Stone and Jones are two prominent right-wing figures who promoted Trump’s incendiary and baseless assertions that the election was stolen.
 
Stone remained in contact with Trump at Mar-a-Lago in Florida and in Washington in the weeks leading up to the Jan. 6 attack, coordinated post-election protests and privately strategized with figures such as former national security adviser Michael Flynn and “Stop the Steal” organizer Ali Alexander, The Washington Post has reported.
 
RELATED ARTICLE -- Post exclusive: The Roger Stone Tapes -- Video shows effort to overturn 2020 election results
 
Stone also communicated via encrypted texts after the 2020 election with Tarrio as well as Stewart Rhodes, the founder and leader of a second right-wing extremist group, the Oath Keepers, accused of playing an outsize role in planning for and organizing violence at the Capitol. Rhodes was on trial Thursday on seditious conspiracy charges in the same courthouse where Bertino pleaded.
 
Before Bertino, all four of 14 people hit with the historically rare charge of seditious conspiracy in the Capitol riots who have pleaded guilty were affiliated with the Oath Keepers.
 
Tarrio and Rhodes were part of a Signal chat group titled F.O.S. — or Friends of Stone, and the pair met in an underground parking garage next to the Capitol the evening before Jan. 6 with leaders of two pro-Trump grass-roots groups.
 
Jones, meanwhile, promoted a Nov. 20, 2020, podcast by Tarrio with Biggs and co-defendant Ethan Nordean in which Tarrio suggested in an expletive-laden call that Trump supporters infiltrate the Biden inauguration and turn it into a “circus, a sign of resistance, a sign of revolution.”
 
PHOTOGRAPH -- Former Proud Boys chairman Henry “Enrique” Tarrio. (Joshua Lott/The Washington Post)
 
Rhodes, Tarrio, Nordean and Biggs have pleaded not guilty to seditious conspiracy and other charges. Stone, who has not been charged, has denied involvement in the Jan. 6 riot. He has previously told The Post: “Any claim, assertion or implication that I knew about, was involved in or condoned the illegal acts at the Capitol on Jan. 6 is categorically false and there is no witness or document that proves otherwise.”
 
An attorney for Alexander said he testified before a federal grand jury this summer after being assured he was not a target of the investigation. Jones has said he did not lead but followed the crowd to the Capitol that day, grew alarmed by the chaos and recorded himself urging calm and directing others not to fight police.
 
Tarrio and Bertino were not in Washington on Jan. 6, the only two of more than 870 federally charged defendants who were elsewhere. But in sworn plea papers that largely restated the 10-count indictment against Tarrio and others, Bertino corroborated many of prosecutors’ allegations against the others, and admitted joining in calls for violence including against police, whose support the Proud Boys have long tried to cultivate.
 
VIDEO -- 4:02 MIN., Videos show meeting with Stewart Rhodes day before Jan. 6, Released videos show Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio meeting Oath Keepers leader Stewart Rhodes the day before the attack on the Capitol. (Video: U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Columbia)
 
Bertino was a regional leader in charge of recruiting handpicked members for the MOSD. He said the group was trying on Dec. 30, 2020, to prepare for the expected arrest of Tarrio for burning a Black Lives Matter flag at an earlier pro-Trump rally in Washington, speculating that it might cause Proud Boys and others gathering for Jan. 6 to “riot.”
 
“Maybe it’s the shot heard round the world and the normies will f--- up the cops,” Bertino admitted saying.
 
Tarrio was arrested Jan. 4, released on bond and later pleaded guilty and completed a jail term this year.
 
RELATED ARTICLE -- Proud Boys leader charged with conspiracy in Capitol insurrection
 
On Jan. 4, according to his indictment, Tarrio posted a voice message to an MOSD leaders group of Proud Boys, stating, “I didn’t hear this voice note until now, you want to storm the Capitol.” After the Capitol was breached, Tarrio wrote in a Telegram group chat, “We did this,” prosecutors said.
 
That night, Bertino — previously identified as “Individual A” or “Person 1” in charging papers — acknowledged messaging Tarrio, “Brother you know we made this happen,” and “1776,” exulting with a profanity. Tarrio replied, “The Winter Palace*,” according to Tarrio’s indictment. Prosecutors allege it is a reference to a Proud Boys planning document that had a section called “Storm the Winter Palace,” referring to the Russian Revolution of 1917 and the former imperial palace in St. Petersburg that was raided by Bolsheviks, CNN first reported.
 
Bertino has been on the radar of both the FBI and a House select committee investigating the events of Jan. 6. Bertino told the House panel that membership “tripled” after Trump famously urged the Proud Boys to “stand back and stand by” during a 2020 presidential debate, according to a video clip of his interview played during a House hearing in June.
 
Social media posts, video recordings from Jan. 6 and earlier charging papers by the FBI also indicate that Nordean and Proud Boys leaders were motivated to confront police that day in part by what they perceived to be an insufficient response to the stabbing of Bertino outside Harry’s Bar in downtown Washington after a pro-Trump demonstration the previous month.
 
The Oath Keepers trial
The latest: Members of the extremist group Oath Keepers, led by founder Stewart Rhodes, planned for an armed rebellion “to shatter a bedrock of American democracy” on Jan. 6, a prosecutor told a jury. Here’s what happened on the second day of testimonies.
 
How did we get here: Stewart Rhodes and other members of his group have been charged with seditious conspiracy in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol.
 
Who is involved: A 13-count indictment charges Stewart Rhodes and eight others with conspiring to use force to oppose the lawful transfer of power to President Biden. Here are the nine Oath Keepers on trial.
 
 
 
DOJ PRESS RELEASE OCTOBER 6, 2022
 
https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/former-leader-proud-boys-pleads-guilty-seditious-conspiracy-efforts-stop-transfer-power
Department of Justice
Office of Public Affairs
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Thursday, October 6, 2022
Former Leader of Proud Boys Pleads Guilty to Seditious Conspiracy for Efforts to Stop Transfer of Power Following 2020 Presidential Election
 
Defendant Also Pleaded to Firearms Charge Stemming from Search of Home This Year
A former leader of the Proud Boys pleaded guilty today to seditious conspiracy for his actions before and during the breach of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. His and others’ actions sought to stop the transfer of power by disrupting a joint session of the U.S. Congress convened to ascertain and count the electoral votes related to the presidential election.
 
Jeremy Bertino, 43, pleaded guilty in the District of Columbia to seditious conspiracy in connection with the Capitol breach. He also pleaded guilty to a charge of unlawful possession of a firearm, stemming from a court-authorized search of his residence in March 2022. As part of the plea agreement, Bertino has agreed to cooperate with the government’s ongoing investigation.
 
According to court documents, the Proud Boys describe themselves as members of a “pro-Western fraternal organization for men who refuse to apologize for creating the modern world, aka Western Chauvinists.” Bertino joined the Proud Boys in approximately 2018 and was, for a time, the vice president of his local Proud Boys chapter in South Carolina.
 
As stated in the court documents, on multiple occasions in 2020, Bertino traveled to Washington, D.C., for rallies as a member of the Proud Boys. During one trip, on Dec. 12, 2020, several individuals, including Bertino and other Proud Boys members, were involved in an altercation. During that altercation, Bertino, among others, was stabbed. Bertino was hospitalized, released, and was still recovering outside of the Washington D.C. area from his injuries as of Jan. 6, 2021. Otherwise, he would have traveled to Washington.
 
In December 2020, Bertino accepted an invitation from Enrique Tarrio, then Proud Boys’ national chairman, to join a new chapter that Tarrio had devised called the “Ministry of Self Defense” (MOSD). In the weeks leading to Jan. 6, Bertino participated in encrypted chats and other communication with members of MOSD leadership. Bertino understood from his discussions with MOSD leadership that they agreed that the presidential election had been stolen, that the purpose of traveling to Washington on Jan. 6, 2021, was to stop the certification of the Electoral College Vote, and that the MOSD leaders were willing to do whatever it would take, including using force against police and others, to achieve that objective.
 
Bertino continued to participate in planning sessions as he recovered from his injures. At least as early as Jan. 4, 2021, he received encrypted chat messages indicating that members of MOSD leadership were discussing the possibility of storming the Capitol. On Jan. 6, Bertino monitored activities through mainstream and social media, as well as posting in the MOSD chats. He posted messages himself to MOSD leaders and members to encourage and assist in the operation, such as advising those on the grounds of the Capitol to “form a spear.” Similarly, Bertino posted to his public social media account, “DO NOT GO HOME. WE ARE ON THE CUSP OF SAVING THE CONSTITUTION.” On the evening of Jan. 6, 2021, Bertino messaged Tarrio and celebrated the achievement, saying, among other things, “You know we made this happen,” and “1776 motherf****r.”
 
The firearms charge stems from an FBI search of Bertino’s residence on March 8, 2022. While executing a search warrant, agents located six firearms, including an AR-15 style firearm with a scope, and more than 3,000 rounds of ammunition. Bertino was barred from possessing firearms and/or ammunition due to a previous conviction.
 
Bertino was charged in a criminal information that was filed today. Five other members of the Proud Boys, including Tarrio, were indicted on June 6, 2022, on seditious conspiracy and other charges. They have pleaded not guilty and are awaiting trial. A sixth member of the group, Charles Donohoe, 34, of Kernersville, North Carolina, pleaded guilty on April 8, 2022, to conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding and assaulting, resisting, or impeding officers.
 
Bertino faces a statutory maximum of 20 years in prison for seditious conspiracy and up to 10 years in prison for the firearms charge. The charges also carry potential financial penalties. No sentencing date was set. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.
 
This case is being prosecuted by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia, the Department of Justice National Security Division’s Counterterrorism Section and the Department of Justice Criminal Division’s Organized Crime and Gang Section. Valuable assistance was provided by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Western District of North Carolina.
 
The case is being investigated by the FBI’s Washington, Charlotte, and Columbia, South Carolina Field Offices.
 
In the 20 months since Jan. 6, 2021, more than 870 individuals have been arrested in nearly all 50 states for crimes related to the breach of the U.S. Capitol, including over 265 individuals charged with assaulting or impeding law enforcement. The investigation remains ongoing.
 
Anyone with tips can call 1-800-CALL-FBI (800-225-5324) or visit tips.fbi.gov.
 
Topic(s):
National Security
Firearms Offenses
Component(s):
National Security Division (NSD)
Press Release Number:
22-1076
Updated October 6, 2022
 
 
 
IN JUNE OF 2022 TARRIO AND OTHERS WERE INDICTED FOR NUMEROUS CHARGES INCLUDING SEDITIOUS CONSPIRACY AND ARE BEING INVESTIGATED BY, AMONG OTHER GROUPS, THE DOJ'S ORGANIZED CRIME AND GANG SECTION. IT COULD BE ARGUED THAT TRUMP HAS ACTED LIKE A CRIME BOSS, HIMSELF. WILL THE OATH KEEPERS RECEIVE THE SAME TREATMENT AS THE PROUD BOYS? WHAT ABOUT THE DOZENS OF "MILITIAS" THAT ARE SPREAD ACROSS THE COUNTRY? WHAT ABOUT POSSIBLE INVOLVEMENT ON THE PART OF THE NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION IN SOME OF THIS? 
 
https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/pr/leader-proud-boys-and-four-other-members-indicted-federal-court-seditious-conspiracy-an-0  
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Monday, June 6, 2022
Leader of Proud Boys and Four Other Members Indicted in Federal Court For Seditious Conspiracy and Other Offenses Related to U.S. Capitol Breach
New Charges in Superseding Indictment
 
            WASHINGTON – A federal grand jury in the District of Columbia returned a superseding indictment today charging five members of the Proud Boys, including the group’s former national chairman, with seditious conspiracy and other charges for their actions before and during the breach of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. Their actions disrupted a joint session of the U.S. Congress convened to ascertain and count the electoral votes related to the presidential election.
 
            The defendants include Henry “Enrique” Tarrio, 38, of Miami, Florida, the former national chairman of the Proud Boys; Ethan Nordean, 31, of Auburn, Washington; Joseph Biggs, 38, of Ormond Beach, Florida; Zachary Rehl, 37, of Philadelphia, and Dominic Pezzola, 44, of Rochester, New York. All previously were indicted and remain detained. They pleaded not guilty to charges contained in earlier indictments.
 
            The superseding indictment adds two charges to the earlier indictment: one count of seditious conspiracy, and one count of conspiracy to prevent an officer from discharging any duties. All defendants now face a total of nine charges, and Pezzola faces an additional robbery charge. The defendants are scheduled to appear for a hearing on June 9, 2022, in the District of Columbia
 
            According to court documents, the Proud Boys describe themselves as members of a “pro-Western fraternal organization for men who refuse to apologize for creating the modern world, aka Western Chauvinists.” Through at least Jan. 6, 2021, Tarrio was the national chairman of the organization. In mid-December of 2020, Tarrio created a special chapter of the Proud Boys known as the “Ministry of Self Defense.” As alleged in the indictment, from in or around December 2020, Tarrio and his co-defendants, all of whom were leaders or members of the Ministry of Self Defense, conspired to prevent, hinder and delay the certification of the Electoral College vote, and to oppose by force the authority of the government of the United States. On Jan. 6, 2021, the defendants directed, mobilized, and led members of the crowd onto the Capitol grounds and into the Capitol, leading to dismantling of metal barricades, destruction of property, breaching of the Capitol building, and assaults on law enforcement.  During and after the attack, Tarrio and his co-defendants claimed credit for what had happened on social media and in an encrypted chat room.
 
               A sixth defendant, who was earlier charged with the group, pleaded guilty on April 8, 2022. Charles Donohoe, 34, of Kernersville, North Carolina, pleaded guilty to conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding and assaulting, resisting, or impeding officers.
 
            This case is being prosecuted by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia, the Department of Justice National Security Division’s Counterterrorism Section, and the Department of Justice Criminal Division’s Organized Crime and Gang Section.
 
            The case is being investigated by the FBI’s Washington Field Office. The charges in the investigation are the result of significant cooperation between agents and staff across numerous FBI Field Offices, and law enforcement agencies.
 
            In the 17 months since Jan. 6, 2021, more than 800 individuals have been arrested in nearly all 50 states for crimes related to the breach of the U.S. Capitol, including over 250 individuals charged with assaulting or impeding law enforcement. The investigation remains ongoing.  Anyone with tips can call 1-800-CALL-FBI (800-225-5324) or visit tips.fbi.gov.
 
            An indictment is merely an allegation, and all defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.
 
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
 
****    ****    ****    ****