Tag: Jan

  • Provisional selection list of Candidates under Pradhan Mantri Bhartiya Jan Aushadhi Kendras (PMBJAKs) 

    [ad_1]

    Provisional selection list of Candidates under Pradhan Mantri Bhartiya Jan Aushadhi Kendras (PMBJAKs)

    Provisional selection list of below mentioned Allopathic Pharmacist on Profit sharing basis under Pradhan Mantri Bhartiya Jan Aushadhi Kendras (PMBJAKs) in District Budgam vide advertisement No: CMOB/ NHW22-23/10054-60 dated 22-02-2023 given below shown at annexure”A”

    Terms and Conditions :

    1. The provisionally selected candidates are directed to report to the Office of the Chief Medical Officer Budgam within Five days from the date of publication of this list along with all the necessary original documents failing which they shall forfeit their claim for Hiring engagement without any further notice in this regard; and the candidate next in the merit list as per the unit of selection shall be considered for the contractual engagement.

    3. The Hiring appointee shall be terminated in case of any adverse from the verification of testimonials.

    4. Candidates who have any grievances shall contact CMOs office, Budgam within three days positively from the date of publication after that no claim shall be accepted.

    Further Details : 

    Provision list

    JKSSB Fresh Recruitment 2023 for 128 Posts

    JKAS Fresh Recruitment 2023

    Jammu Srinagar Daily Highway Traffic updates

    Join Telegram | Install App for Iphone and Android



    [ad_2]
    #Provisional #selection #list #Candidates #Pradhan #Mantri #Bhartiya #Jan #Aushadhi #Kendras #PMBJAKs

    ( With inputs from : The News Caravan.com )

  • DOJ cites threats to democracy on Jan. 6 in push for steep Oath Keepers sentences

    DOJ cites threats to democracy on Jan. 6 in push for steep Oath Keepers sentences

    [ad_1]

    capitol riot investigation 29499

    “As this Court is well aware, the justice system’s reaction to January 6 bears the weighty responsibility of impacting whether January 6 becomes an outlier or a watershed moment,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Jeffrey Nestler wrote in the 183-page sentencing memo. “Left unchecked, this impulse threatens our democracy.”

    Prosecutors cited polling from earlier this year showing that one in five Americans believe political violence is sometimes justified and that one in 10 “believes it would be justified if it meant the return of President Trump.”

    Rhodes was charged with seditious conspiracy last year alongside nearly a dozen Oath Keepers for their roles in the Jan. 6 attack. Prosecutors alleged that Rhodes embraced Donald Trump’s false claims that the 2020 presidential election was stolen and used it to mobilize Oath Keepers across the country to resist the results of the election.

    “These defendants were prepared to fight. Not for their country, but against it,” prosecutors wrote in their sentencing memo. “In their own words, they were ‘willing to die’ in a ‘guerilla war’ to achieve their goal of halting the transfer of power after the 2020 Presidential Election. … These defendants played a central and damning role in opposing by force the government of the United States, breaking the solemn oath many of them swore as members of the United States Armed Forces.”

    In an eight-week trial last year, prosecutors presented evidence that the group planned to descend on Washington, D.C., on Jan. 6 in response to Trump’s call about two weeks earlier for supporters to “be there, will be wild.” They stockpiled weapons, which prosecutors contend were meant to be available if the mob’s clash with police turned even more violent than it did, at a Comfort Inn in Arlington, Va.

    Rhodes, an Army veteran, Yale Law School graduate and disbarred attorney, was one of a pair of Oath Keepers convicted by a jury last November on rare seditious conspiracy charges for planning an assault on the Capitol as Congress was tallying the electoral votes as part of the process transitioning power from Trump to President Joe Biden.

    The other person convicted on the marquee charge was Kelly Meggs, a leader of the Florida Oath Keepers. Three Oath Keepers members tried with Rhodes and Meggs were acquitted of seditious conspiracy, but convicted on other felony charges.

    Four other Oath Keepers were convicted of seditious conspiracy at a second trial in January. And three more pleaded guilty to seditious conspiracy over the past year.

    In addition to the nine Oath Keepers who have been convicted of seditious conspiracy, five members of the far-right Proud Boys have also been convicted of or pleaded guilty to the charge. Four of them, including the group’s national leader Enrique Tarrio, were found guilty by a jury on Thursday. The sentencing recommendation for Rhodes is a window into the likely sentence that prosecutors will seek for Tarrio and his allies.

    The recommendation for the stiff prison term for Rhodes was sent Friday night to U.S. District Court Judge Amit Mehta, who has presided over three jury trials for Oath Keepers members. A fourth is slated to take place later this year.

    Mehta, an appointee of former President Barack Obama, has scheduled sentencing for Rhodes, Meggs and several other convicted Oath Keepers over a series of dates in late May and early June.

    Prosecutors also announced in their Friday night submission that they are seeking similarly lengthy sentences for others convicted in the Oath Keepers trials to date, including: 21 years for Meggs, 18 years for Jessica Watkins, 17 years for Roberto Minuta, 17 years for Ed Vallejo, 15 years for Kenneth Harrelson and 14 years for Thomas Caldwell. Each of them would equal or exceed the lengthiest sentences given to Jan. 6 defendants so far.

    Prosecutors arrived at those steep sentencing recommendations in part by labeling the actions of Rhodes and his co-conspirators “terrorism,” defined in the criminal code as “acts that were intended to influence the government through intimidation or coercion.” The Justice Department has sought this enhancement in relatively few Jan. 6 cases and with limited success.

    Judges declined to adopt it in several cases against high-profile Jan. 6 defendants — but none had been convicted of seditious conspiracy and none were alleged to have played as large a role in the Jan. 6 attack as Rhodes and his allies.

    Prosecutors also dinged Rhodes and several allies for participating in post-trial interviews in which they defended their actions on Jan. 6. Rhodes, in particular, they said “continues to invoke the words and deeds of the Founding Fathers in not-so-veiled calls for violent opposition to the government.”

    About 1,000 people have been charged criminally in connection with the Jan. 6, 2021 riot at the Capitol, but prosecutors said Rhodes and other members of the fiercely anti-government Oath Keepers deserve lengthy prison sentences because they were instigators of the unrest and violence that broke out that day.

    While the vast majority of those charged entered the Capitol building, Rhodes and Tarrio were convicted on the serious seditious conspiracy charge despite never setting foot in the building that day. Rhodes was in Washington and marched with Oath Keepers members, but remained in a parking lot as rioters entered the building and clashed with police. Tarrio had been arrested by police a couple of days before and was in Baltimore when the violence unfolded on Jan. 6 after being ordered to leave Washington.

    While the 25-year recommendation for Rhodes is the lengthiest yet in Jan. 6 cases, it is only slightly longer than the 24-year, six-month sentence prosecutors sought for a man sentenced Friday for repeatedly assaulting police officers during the riot.

    A jury convicted Peter Schwartz, 49, last December on assault and civil disorder charges for throwing a chair at police and spraying them with pepper spray, all while armed with a wooden tire knocker. According to prosecutors, unlike many Jan. 6 defendants, Schwartz had “a substantial violent criminal history.”

    Mehta, the same judge handling the Oath Keeper’s cases, sentenced Schwartz to 14 years in prison. While that was more than a decade short of what prosecutors asked for, it was the longest sentence yet for a Jan. 6 offender. The next longest was also handed out by Mehta: 10 years for Thomas Webster, a retired New York City police officer who assaulted a D.C. cop on the front lines of the Capitol riot. Prosecutors had sought a 17-and-a-half year term in that case.

    [ad_2]
    #DOJ #cites #threats #democracy #Jan #push #steep #Oath #Keepers #sentences
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Proud Boys leader found guilty of seditious conspiracy for driving Jan. 6 attack

    Proud Boys leader found guilty of seditious conspiracy for driving Jan. 6 attack

    [ad_1]

    A jury on Thursday convicted Enrique Tarrio, the former leader of the Proud Boys, and three allies of a seditious conspiracy to derail the transfer of power from Donald Trump to Joe Biden, a historic verdict following the most significant trial to emerge from the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol.

    Jurors also convicted the four men — who also include Ethan Nordean, Joseph Biggs and Zachary Rehl — of conspiring to obstruct Congress’ proceedings on Jan. 6 and destroying government property. The jury deadlocked on seditious conspiracy against a fifth defendant, Dominic Pezzola, but convicted him of obstructing Congress’ Jan. 6 proceedings as well as several other felony charges.

    Prosecutors cast Tarrio and the Proud Boys leaders as the most significant drivers of the Jan. 6 attack, assembling a “fighting force” that arrived at the Capitol even while Trump addressed a crowd of supporters near the White House. Members of the group were present for and involved in multiple breaches of police lines. They later celebrated their role in the breach.

    [ad_2]
    #Proud #Boys #leader #guilty #seditious #conspiracy #driving #Jan #attack
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Meet Maqbool Jan Award-winning paper mache artist from Srinagar

    Meet Maqbool Jan Award-winning paper mache artist from Srinagar

    [ad_1]

    Jahangeer Ganaie

    Srinagar, Apr 28: Winner of several State, National and International Awards Maqbool Jan, an artist from Srinagar’s Lal Bazar area continues to take papier-mâché technique and water colours to new heights and demands its introduction as subject education institutions.

    Though there is no such school where the youth of Kashmir Valley are taught the art of papier-mâché, Jan has trained dozens of students so far who too are masters of this art now.

    Mohammad Maqbool Jan (58) from Mughal Mohalla in Lal Bazar area of Srinagar while talking to news—Kashmir News Observer (KNO), said that he has been associated with this art since childhood as he had to learn this art very early due to the untimely death of his father.

    “Our whole family is associated with this art and have been earning our livelihood very well besides that I have taught dozens of persons who too are taking art pieces on their own level,” he said.

    Hardwork always pays and we have been always working to promote this art, Maqbool said while adding that he has participated in various exhibitions and has consistently received excellent responses for his craft.

    Maqbool said that his innovative and creative skills were rapidly recognized and he won several state awards.

    He was awarded the prestigious UNESCO Seal of Excellence for handicrafts in 2007-2008 while he has won state award in 2013 and four National Awards.

    “I want to see that our new generation should see their culture through art and we have to work to bring innovations in this art so that it gets more and more recognition at international stages,” he said.

    “As music has been introduced as a subject in educational institutions but the government is yet to introduce paper mache as a subject in educational institutions so that we can have local trainers but in absence of such things, we have to bring trainers from outside J&K,” Jan said.

    There is no such school where the youth of Kashmir Valley are taught this season, he said,while demanding that a curriculum be prepared by institutions in the Kashmir Valley to promote this art form, he said.

    “We need to respect these arts as sufi saints introduced in Kashmir and have been passed on orally from one generation to the next and still there are dozens of artists who have been associated with this art,” he said. “I want the papier-mâché art to reach our future generations, but given the paltry income an artist is able to generate it is difficult that youth will find interest in it.”

    He said that government must take steps to help artists so that art can be taught to next generations that will help them to earn livelihood and boost tourism sector as well—(KNO)

    [ad_2]
    #Meet #Maqbool #Jan #Awardwinning #paper #mache #artist #Srinagar

    ( With inputs from : roshankashmir.net )

  • ‘QAnon shaman’ says former lawyer failed him over Jan. 6 videos

    ‘QAnon shaman’ says former lawyer failed him over Jan. 6 videos

    [ad_1]

    capitol breach chansley 33264

    “The filing of a notice of intent to use CCTV video should have caused Attorney Watkins to request that sentencing be postponed in order to obtain from the government all video evidence of Mr. Chansley from inside the Capitol,” Shipley wrote. “By not securing the video and determining whether it supported Mr. Chansley’s description of events, Attorney Watkins allowed the Government to take liberties in describing Mr. Chansley’s conduct while inside the Capitol, without fear of the unproduced videos contradicting the Government’s claims.”

    Chansley pleaded guilty in September 2021 to obstruction of an official proceeding.

    The new motion was prompted by video footage that House Speaker Kevin McCarthy shared exclusively with Tucker Carlson, then of Fox News, earlier this year. Some of the video Carlson aired showed police appearing to open a door for Chansley and to direct him through various hallways in the Capitol.

    Prosecutors claimed in correspondence with Shipley that almost all the videos aired during Carlson’s program last month were made available to his then-attorney and others on a data-sharing platform in October 2021. However, Shipley asserts that prosecutors in another case said the videos were uploaded the prior month “and it is quite likely that both [claims] are false.”

    In addition to claiming Chansley’s lawyer didn’t explore the video issue sufficiently, the motion argues that prosecutors violated Chansley’s rights by failing to isolate and highlight the videos Shipley contends are exculpatory. Prosecutors have argued that they fulfilled their obligations by turning over a massive trove of video evidence to all defendants and by alerting defendants to relevant videos that prosecutors were aware of.

    The motion is likely to have little direct effect on the most significant element of Chansley’s sentence — his time spent behind bars — because he was released last month from a federal prison in Arizona and sent to a halfway house. A federal prisoner database shows he’s scheduled for release from custody in May. He served only about 27 months of his 41-month sentence due to various policies crediting prisoners with so-called “good time” and allowing for transition programs like halfway houses.

    Shipley did not immediately respond to a request for comment Thursday night on what concrete benefit the motion can achieve for Chansley at this juncture, but the motion suggests that the video footage undermines prosecutors’ claims that Chansley intended violence when he entered the Capitol. U.S. District Court Judge Royce Lamberth, who sentenced Chansley and will handle the new motion, applied an enhancement for use of violence that more or less doubled the recommended sentence for Chansley.

    Lamberth, an appointee of President Ronald Reagan, also ruled early in Chansley’s case that a finial on an American flag he carried in the Capitol could have been used as a spear so it qualified as a weapon. The finding supported Lamberth’s decision to deny Chansley release on bond.

    Whatever the actions of the police, prosecutors have contended that Chansley acted in a manner that was unambiguously threatening. After going onto the Senate floor, he went up on the dais, writing and leaving a note saying: “It’s only a matter of time. Justice is coming.” Chansley has contended he was “peaceful” on Jan. 6, never engaging in the violence some other protesters did.

    Watkins and a spokesperson for the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Washington also did not respond to messages Thursday night seeking comment on the filing.

    [ad_2]
    #QAnon #shaman #lawyer #failed #Jan #videos
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Pence appears before Jan. 6 grand jury

    Pence appears before Jan. 6 grand jury

    [ad_1]

    Pence was at the courthouse for more than five hours. His appearance before the grand jury was confirmed by two people who were not authorized to discuss it publicly.

    His testimony began just hours after a federal appeals court rejected Trump’s emergency bid to block Pence from testifying or limit the scope of prosecutors’ potential questions.

    A three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals issued an order late Wednesday denying the former president’s last-ditch effort. Though the order remains sealed to protect grand jury secrecy, POLITICO had previously confirmed Trump’s appeal, which followed a district court judge’s order that required Pence to testify.

    Prosecutors are interested in Trump’s increasingly desperate effort to seize a second term he didn’t win, which intensified after he lost dozens of court battles aimed at overturning the results. Trump, aided by attorneys and allies pushing fringe legal theories, pressed Pence to use his perch on Jan. 6, when he was required to preside over a joint session of Congress to count the electoral votes certifying Biden’s victory.

    As Jan. 6 approached, Trump pushed Pence to assert the power to reject or delay counting Biden’s electoral votes. But Pence resisted his pressure, ultimately determining he had no power to decide which electoral votes to count or reject. Trump lashed out at Pence after his decision became clear on the morning of Jan. 6, inflaming a crowd that Trump had sent to the Capitol to protest the election results. Later, that crowd would form a mob that overran the building, sending Pence and lawmakers fleeing for safety

    Aides to the former vice president did not comment on the appeals court’s decision or Pence’s appearance but have previously indicated Pence would follow the orders of the court.

    Smith subpoenaed Pence in February, prompting separate challenges by both Trump and Pence.

    While Trump argued that Pence’s testimony should be barred or limited by executive privilege, Pence took a different tack. He contended that his role presiding over Congress on Jan. 6 — fulfilling his constitutional role as president of the Senate — entitled him to immunity under the so-called “speech or debate” clause, which protects Congress from executive branch intrusion.

    Chief U.S. District Court Judge James Boasberg rejected Trump’s argument but agreed with Pence that the congressional immunity applied on certain topics — a historic decision that for the first time found vice presidents enjoy a form of privilege. Although Boasberg’s ruling was narrower than Pence’s attorney, Emmet Flood, had argued for, Pence opted not to appeal the decision.

    Trump earlier this month sought an emergency order from the court of appeals blocking Boasberg’s ruling. But Wednesday’s order — a unanimous ruling by Judges Patricia Millett, Robert Wilkins and Gregory Katsas — rejected that effort. Millett and Wilkins are Obama appointees, while Katsas is a Trump appointee.

    Betsy Woodruff Swan contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]
    #Pence #appears #Jan #grand #jury
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Appeals court denies Trump bid to block Pence testimony to Jan. 6 grand jury

    Appeals court denies Trump bid to block Pence testimony to Jan. 6 grand jury

    [ad_1]

    election 2024 pence 09771

    The ruling is a victory for Jack Smith, the special counsel probing Trump’s bid to subvert the 2020 election. Smith subpoenaed Pence in February, prompting separate challenges by both Trump and Pence.

    While Trump argued that Pence’s testimony should be barred or limited by executive privilege, Pence took a different tack. He contended that his role presiding over Congress on Jan. 6, 2021 — fulfilling his constitutional role as president of the Senate — entitled him to immunity under the so-called “speech or debate” clause, which protects Congress from Executive Branch intrusion.

    Chief U.S. District Court Judge James Boasberg rejected Trump’s argument but agreed with Pence that the congressional immunity applied on certain topics — a historic decision that for the first time found vice presidents enjoy a form of privilege.

    Although Boasberg’s ruling was narrower than Pence’s attorney, Emmet Flood, had argued for, Pence opted not to appeal the decision.

    Trump earlier this month sought an emergency order from the court of appeals blocking Boasberg’s ruling. But Wednesday’s order — a unanimous ruling by Judges Patricia Millett, Robert Wilkins and Gregory Katsas — rejected that effort. Millett and Wilkins are Obama appointees, while Katsas is a Trump appointee.

    It’s unclear when Pence will appear before the grand jury, but Trump’s previous emergency appeals — which have nearly all failed when it comes to similar sealed orders — have occurred just days before witnesses were scheduled to appear.

    [ad_2]
    #Appeals #court #denies #Trump #bid #block #Pence #testimony #Jan #grand #jury
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Proud Boys leader, awaiting Jan. 6 sedition verdict, assails Justice Department

    Proud Boys leader, awaiting Jan. 6 sedition verdict, assails Justice Department

    [ad_1]

    capitol riot proud boys 56260

    “I’m the next stepping stone,” Tarrio said in the call, which was broadcast to a freewheeling Twitter Space organized by the Gateway Pundit, a far-right media outlet known for promoting conspiracy theories about Jan. 6 and the government.

    Tarrio’s attorneys used their closing arguments in court Tuesday morning to lay blame for the Jan. 6 Capitol attack at the feet of Donald Trump, who they say bore the ultimate responsibility for riling up supporters and aiming them at Congress. Tarrio praised his legal team but declined to elaborate on their contention.

    But his lawyers’ claim stands at odds with many of Tarrio’s far-right supporters who have, with no evidence, characterized Jan. 6 as a government setup fueled by undercover agents, or the result of left-wing agitators.

    Tarrio also used the call to praise congressional Republicans — including House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan by name — for pursuing investigations about the “weaponization” of government. He said Jordan should call some Jan. 6 defendants to testify about their experiences.

    Tarrio’s decision to speak publicly came two weeks after he opted against taking the stand in the trial. He elaborated on that decision in Tuesday’s call, saying he wanted to avoid a grilling from prosecutors about statements he’s made over the years.

    “What’s happening is, in these cross examinations, they’re bringing things in from years past — things from 2015, 2016, 2017 is fair game,” Tarrio said. “It has nothing to do with January 6th. We were afraid they were going to use old statements, muddy up the waters.”

    Prosecutors have charged Tarrio and four allies with acting as the “tip of the spear” of the mob that overran the Capitol, assembling a group of hundreds of Proud Boys to form a “fighting force” on Jan. 6. Those men surged across police barricades and stoked the crowd’s anger at decisive moments in the melee. One of them — Dominic Pezzola — ignited the breach of the Capitol itself when he smashed a Senate window with a riot shield.

    Tarrio wasn’t present on Jan. 6 — he had been ordered to stay away from Washington due to an arrest for a separate charge two days earlier — but prosecutors say he stayed in contact with other Proud Boys leaders from a hotel in Baltimore and later celebrated their role in the attack.

    Tarrio spoke to supporters and journalists for more than an hour Tuesday, calling into the Twitter broadcast from the cell phone of a friend, Bobby Pickles. He claimed he’s treated as a greater security risk in the Alexandria jail than the Lockerbie bomber, who is housed in the same facility, and he lamented being held in his cell for 23 hours a day.

    Although two of Tarrio’s codefendants — Pezzola and Zachary Rehl — took the stand last week, Tarrio opted against testifying. But in Tuesday’s call, he echoed the arguments defense lawyers made about the Proud Boys, describing their often violent or vulgar language in group chats as “locker room” banter.

    “It’s simple fun,” he said.

    Tarrio also insisted that he never opened or saw a document titled “1776 Returns” that prosecutors featured in the case. The document, sent to Tarrio by a girlfriend a week before Jan. 6, outlines a plan to storm government buildings in order to protest the election results. Defense attorneys in the case argued that there was no evidence Tarrio ever opened the document, though an FBI agent called by prosecutors noted that Tarrio’s Google searches at that time referenced “The Winter Palace,” an analogy to the Russian Revolution that was referenced in 1776 Returns. Tarrio also referred to “The Winter Palace” on the night of Jan. 6 in text messages with Proud Boy Jeremy Bertino.

    Tarrio also used the call to emphasize that he believes the jury in his case can be “fair.” Although many of his allies have been sharply critical of the judge in his case, Tim Kelly, Tarrio described any conflicts with him as simple disagreements over legal issues and said he respects the court’s decisions.

    Tarrio also said he and his codefendants “are in a good place.”

    “We’re very positive,” he said. “We haven’t given up on each other.”

    [ad_2]
    #Proud #Boys #leader #awaiting #Jan #sedition #verdict #assails #Justice #Department
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Proud Boys leaders: Trump caused Jan. 6 attack

    Proud Boys leaders: Trump caused Jan. 6 attack

    [ad_1]

    portland protests 13009

    “It was not Enrique Tarrio. They want to use Enrique Tarrio as a scapegoat for Donald Trump and those in power,” Hassan said.

    Trump has loomed in the background of Tarrio’s trial, the most significant to emerge from the Jan. 6 assault on Congress. He’s charged alongside four other Proud Boys leaders — Ethan Nordean, Joe Biggs, Zachary Rehl and Dominic Pezzola — with orchestrating a violent effort to derail the transfer of power from Trump to Joe Biden. The jury is expected to receive the case and begin deliberating Tuesday afternoon.

    Prosecutors say the leaders, loyal to Trump and fearful of the Proud Boys’ survival in a post-Trump America, devised plans to keep Trump in office. And throughout the four-month trial, the Justice Department repeatedly emphasized how Tarrio and the Proud Boys keyed off and drew energy from Trump’s own bid to subvert the 2020 election. The group’s plan went into overdrive, prosecutors said, after Trump’s Dec. 19, 2020 tweet calling on supporters to descend on Washington on Jan. 6, 2021 to challenge the election results.

    In tandem with their effort to support Trump, the Proud Boys also soured on their once close relationship with law enforcement, prosecutors say, becoming enraged at cops — particularly in Washington — after they failed to apprehend a man who stabbed four Proud Boys outside a bar on Dec. 12, 2020. That anger at police carried over into the Proud Boys’ posture toward law enforcement on Jan. 6, they say.

    Hassan, though, said it was Trump pulling the strings and driving events ahead of Jan. 6 — not Tarrio. He was joined in that contention by Biggs’ lawyer Norm Pattis, who said Trump and his cadre of lawyers stoked the “stop the steal” fervor among millions of supporters.

    “The leader of the free world sold this narrative, and many members of the Proud Boys believed it,” Pattis said. “People believe their president … He’s not on trial here, much though I wish he were.”

    “If my president tells me my republic is being stolen, who do I listen to?” Pattis added. “The thief or the commander-in-chief? … A nation of strangers gathered together as their commander in chief sold a lie.”

    Hassan noted that Trump contributed to a surge in Proud Boys recruitment after invoking the group — and urging members to “stand back and stand by” during a televised debate against Biden in September 2020. That membership boom harmed the group’s vetting and led to undisciplined members provoking unconstrained violence and street clashes in Washington in November and December 2020.

    That led Tarrio to form a new Proud Boys chapter — dubbed the “Ministry of Self Defense” — to select Proud Boys who could be trusted to follow rules and obey orders. That chapter, which grew to hundreds nationwide, became the core of the group that Tarrio helped assemble in Washington on Jan. 6.

    Prosecutors say the Ministry of Self Defense — or MOSD — was really a “fighting force” that Tarrio mobilized to attack the seat of government in service of keeping Trump in power. Hundreds of members joined Proud Boys leaders in Washington and were prominent parts of the crowd that breached the barricades in the first wave of the riot. In numerous cases, Proud Boys in this group were among those who helped topple barricades or tussled with police in ways that helped clear a path for the riot to advance closer to the Capitol.

    But Hassan emphasized that Tarrio’s role in the entire sequence of events was tenuous. He was arrested in Washington on Jan. 4, 2021, for burning a Black Lives Matter flag after the Dec. 12, 2020 pro-Trump march. After he was released from police custody, he was ordered to leave Washington and went to a hotel in Baltimore, from where he observed the events of Jan. 6.

    Prosecutors say Tarrio made public comments and social media posts that encouraged his men as they entered the Capitol, at one point saying “Don’t fucking leave,” as rioters occupied the Capitol. These comments, prosecutors say, prove the real purpose of the Proud Boys’ presence. As their handpicked members helped overwhelm police — and even after Pezzola used a stolen police riot shield to smash a Senate window and ignite the breach of the building — Tarrio and the other leaders never rebuked them or urged them to pull back.

    “Make no mistake,” Tarrio told a group of national Proud Boys leaders in a private chat after the attack. “We did this.”

    Hassan spent much of his closing argument urging jurors not to convict Tarrio because they disliked him. Tarrio was brash, said offensive things and often acted like an “entertainer,” Hassan said.

    “Do not let your dislike for Henry Enrique Tarrio affect your judgment in that jury room,” Hassan said.

    Dislike of the defendants was a theme in the Proud Boys’ closing arguments. Pezzola’s attorney, Steven Metcalf, urged jurors not to confuse their dislike for Pezzola with his potential guilt of the crimes he’s charged with.

    “Even if you hate him … put that aside in judging these facts,” Metcalf said.

    Metcalf agreed that Pezzola broke the law — as Pezzola largely did when he took the stand last week — but said he’s not guilty of seditious conspiracy, which he called a “fairy tale, fairy dust conspiracy created out of nowhere.”

    Metcalf contended that Pezzola’s relationship with the other defendants was nearly nonexistent, even on Jan. 6. But he said prosecutors needed to link him to Tarrio and the other defendants to prove that violence, destruction and anger were part of the conspiracy.

    “What did they need Dom for? You needed Dom to muddy up these guys. They needed dirt,” Metcalf said.

    [ad_2]
    #Proud #Boys #leaders #Trump #caused #Jan #attack
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Pezzola testimony sheds light on a lingering Jan. 6 mystery — and a critical lie

    Pezzola testimony sheds light on a lingering Jan. 6 mystery — and a critical lie

    [ad_1]

    gettyimages 1230734050 c

    It seemed at the time to be smoking-gun evidence linking the Proud Boys to the earliest moments of violence on Jan. 6. But Pezzola now says he wasn’t telling the truth.

    On Thursday, on the witness stand in his seditious conspiracy trial — alongside Biggs and three other Proud Boys leaders — Pezzola acknowledged he lied to the FBI about that episode, claiming he believed it would persuade investigators to relax the harsh conditions of his pretrial detention.

    “I basically felt like my conditions at the jail wouldn’t improve unless I gave them more,” Pezzola said under questioning from his attorney Steven Metcalf.

    The brief exchange between Biggs and Samsel, captured on widely circulated video of the earliest moments of the riot, has been the subject of intense scrutiny because of the role Samsel played in setting off the melee along with Biggs’ leadership role in the Proud Boys. It remains unclear what the two said to each other.

    Pezzola said he was initially incarcerated in Washington, D.C., in a cell immediately next to Samsel, who he said told him that Biggs had goaded him to attack the police line. Pezzola said he knew it was false but relayed the story to the FBI anyway, hoping they would relax his conditions of confinement, which were particularly harsh amid the Covid pandemic. (Samsel is slated to go on trial later this year for his role in the events of Jan. 6.)

    In the version of events that Pezzola told the FBI during the March interview, he witnessed Proud Boys harassing a boy wearing a “Black Lives Matter” shirt just before Biggs had his exchange with Samsel. He told investigators “Mr. Biggs told Samsel that if he wasn’t antifa, he should prove it by pushing down the barricades,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Eric Kenerson indicated when he grilled Pezzola about the episode.

    Prosecutors agreed that they had no evidence Biggs possessed a gun on Jan. 6 but pointed to the episode to underscore Pezzola’s lies to authorities — which they say undercut his attempts to portray himself as honest and honorable. Pezzola said he retracted the story during a third meeting with the FBI while the bureau was still seeking to gain his cooperation.

    The New York Times first reported the dispute about Samsel’s account of the episode in October 2021, but Pezzola’s involvement in the matter was newly disclosed this week.

    The exchange about the Samsel episode kicked off a contentious turn for Pezzola on the witness stand. Pezzola spent Tuesday and Wednesday, under questioning from Metcalf, expressing contrition about aspects of his conduct at the Capitol — from his decision to smash the window to a celebratory selfie video he shot inside the Capitol while smoking a cigar.

    He repeatedly sniped at prosecutors, accusing them of lodging “fake charges” against him and bringing him to a “corrupt trial.”

    “You’re just twisting my words, Mr. Kenerson,” he said at one point during the questioning.

    Pezzola leveled conspiracy theories, repeatedly attempting to work in mentions of Ray Epps, a former Oath Keeper from Arizona who has become the subject of Trump allies’ false claims that he acted as a government operative. (Epps was visible in several videos nearby Pezzola and other Proud Boys leaders.)

    After several references, Kenerson pressed Pezzola on the point.

    “Mr. Pezzola, you have absolutely no evidence that Ray Epps is a government informant, do you?” Kenerson said.

    “I’ve seen no evidence that he isn’t,” Pezzola replied.

    Kenerson spent hours undercutting Pezzola’s claims that he spent most of his time at the Capitol spontaneously reacting to “police brutality” and attempting to protect himself and others from unjustified force. The prosecutor pressed Pezzola on how he was able to judge that the efforts by outnumbered police to control the crowd were unjustified, and Pezzola repeatedly acknowledged he had no expertise in the munitions that were used or how police chose to deploy them.

    Pezzola also repeatedly quibbled with Kenerson about whether his attempt to rip a riot shield away from an officer who had waded into the crowd was really an attempt to “take possession” of it. Rather, Pezzola said he merely wanted it to protect himself from a hail of rubber bullets and flash bangs that he said agitated the crowd.

    But Kenerson challenged Pezzola on these points, noting that in all the video, there are no images of him using the shield to cover his face or head. He posed for a photo with it before rushing with the mob to the base of the Capitol and using it to smash a window.

    Pezzola returned the shield to an officer as he exited the Capitol about 20 minutes after he went inside, stopping to blow a smoke ring in the general direction of police after they took it from him, Kenerson noted.

    [ad_2]
    #Pezzola #testimony #sheds #light #lingering #Jan #mystery #critical #lie
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )