Government witness Graydon Young admitted to not conspiring with individuals to commit a crime on Jan. 6, following a cross-examination by defense attorneys this week.
Young plead guilty to conspiracy and obstruction of Congress this June. The government put him on the witness stand to testify against Oathkeepers Stewart Rhodes, Kelly Meggs, Kenneth Harrelson, Jessica Watkins, and Thomas Caldwell.
It appeared Young was following instructions in his plea deal to tell the government’s side of the story. He announced his remorse and embarrassment.
However, when the defense cross-examined him, Young admitted he did not conspire with anyone verbally outside of the Capitol. He felt what he was doing was “common sense” given the circumstances.
Is the prosecution stringing together a broad narrative that doesn’t fit what actually happened?
Another government witness, FBI Special Agent Harris, admitted to embellishing the “stack formation” Oathkeepers used to stay together. There are no messages within any Oathkeeper chats containing the word ‘stack.’
“We gave them the ‘stack’ name,” said Special Agent Harris, referring to the government.
There is nothing overtly criminal about people standing in a line and placing their hand on the shoulder of the person in front of them.
Harris also admitted a text message prosecutor Jeffrey Nestler showed the jury was used out of context.
Kelly Meggs stated “We’re reloading now” in a group chat. However, defense attorney Juli Haller got Special Agent Harris to admit he was not reloading an actual weapon. In reality, he implied the group was reorganizing.
Judge Mehta appeared to blow this off as though it wasn’t important. He made it sound like Haller’s line of questioning was just a “conversation” as opposed to a real line of questioning.
Is the government trying to confuse legal conduct with criminal conduct because it is hiding something?
Join the conversation
Please share your thoughts about this article below. We value your opinions, and would love to see you add to the discussion.