Shocking that such a gentle-looking soul would be found guilty of attempting to overthrow the United States government. Nevertheless, yesterday a federal jury convicted Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes, along with his lieutenant, Kelly Meggs, of seditious conspiracy in the 6 Jan. 2021 attack on the Capital Building, as legislators — most of them, anyway — were also attempting to certify the presidential election of Joe Biden.
Three others were convicted of obstructing Congress as it convened to do its Constitutional duty. The Washington Post notes that "both offenses are punishable by up to 20 years in prison." The Post additionally notes that Rhodes' prosecution came after "an internal debate" at the Justice Department "over whether the magnitude and organization behind the Capitol attack merited bringing seldom used seditious conspiracy charges."
The potential handicap for Justice was that the defendants' intent to actually, materially overthrow the government had to be proved in court, as opposed to proving the lesser charge of conspiracy to obstruct a congressional proceeding. The former involved crawling into the defendants' minds and demonstrating their intentions beyond a reasonable doubt. Given that the conspirators labored for months and on the record to organize the assault, well, that helped.
Their defense was that they went to Washington only as peacekeepers. Here is the key passage in their defense argument, again from the Post: "[They brought] firearms only in case Trump met their demand to mobilize private militia to stop Biden from becoming president." It would seem, however, that the "peacekeepers" had a fairly high confidence level that the sitting president would do just that: that he would meet their demand to violently prevent an orderly transition of power, if need be.
Where would they get such an idea? Were they inspired only by Trump's "Stop the Steal" speech on Jan. 6, in which he told the Oathkeepers and others that "if you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore." He added that "all of us here today do not want to see our election victory stolen by emboldened radical-left Democrats, which is what they’re doing."
He went on. "We will never give up, we will never concede. It doesn’t happen. You don’t concede when there’s theft involved ... Our country has had enough. We will not take it anymore and that’s what this is all about … We will stop the steal ... You’ll never take back our country with weakness, you have to show strength and you have to be strong."
Which is to ask, Were the defendants acutely inspired? Was it merely Trump's heated words on that day — balanced, here and there, by softer, cooler phrasing — that convinced them of radical-left Democrats' intransigence; that anything short of violence would only cost them their country?
Of course not. They traveled to Washington as well-armed predators because Trump had for months — years, even — told them that radical-left evildoers would steal the 2020 election, just as they had tried to steal the 2016 election. The press has helpfully curated Trump's fighting words of Jan. 6, but I know of no source that has compiled the entirety of his spearheading, yearslong calls to action to keep him in power, notwithstanding the voters' will.
In brief, Stewart Rhodes & Friends may be excessively hormoned and spectacularly stupid, but they're also something of fall guys. The ringleader of the Jan. 6 attempt to overthrow the government of the United States remains free in Florida, organizing a presidential campaign, staging rallies, and poisoning jury pools.
Attorney General Merrick Garland praised the verdict against Rhodes et al. "Today the jury returned a verdict convicting all defendants of criminal conduct, including two Oath Keepers leaders for seditious conspiracy against the United States," he said. "The Justice Department is committed to holding accountable those criminally responsible for the assault on our democracy on January 6, 2021."
Garland's appointment of Special Counsel Jack Smith has not foreclosed accountability, but the appointment needlessly postponed it — thus weakened it. The attorney general's public reasoning for naming a special counsel — that that would alleviate suspicions of Justice's politicization — has only widened the window and expanded the vista for the right to politicize the investigation of Trump for seditious conspiracy.
The longer the wait for Trump's prosecution, the shorter the odds not only for his conviction.
The Post adumbrates the Justice Department's thinking: "The verdict in Rhodes’s case likely will be taken as a bellwether for two remaining Jan. 6 seditious conspiracy trials set for December against five other Oath Keepers and leaders of the Proud Boys, including the longtime chairman Henry 'Enrique' Tarrio." No mention of prosecuting Jan. 6's actual leadership. That job has been subcontracted.
Sure, go ahead, lock 'em up, the Oath Keepers and Proud Boys and all the other unhinged, violent crackpots. Justice — both meanings — demands it. But the attorney general's actions (and non-actions) to date have made some of us rather doubtful about the supreme villain's ultimate(?) prosecution. Garland's heart doesn't seem to be in it.