president calls that was 2 days before the january 6, him talking about a nuclear option. do we have any idea how far they were willing to take it and what he meant by a nuclear option? that s a good question. my assumption, frankly, is that he meant that the plans he detailed there were the plans they would execute and those are the plans they executed. they had weapons stored at, i think the comfort inn in arlington virginia, across the river from dc. had people in washington at the capitol building, also had someone at that comfort inn who was, according to the indictment, texting oathkeepers at the capitol building throughout the day ask if they had instructions, the way the texts are presented it reads like this person in the comfort inn in arlington wanted to know, when do i bring in the weapons, how can i be helpful in this situation? there was very much a lot of organization. look, one of the challenges for people who work in the intelligence space is distinguishing betwe
because this is the first indictment at all of stewart rhodes, in addition, some of what is laid out here is stuff rhodes said publicly, including people would be in the united states, have military equipment nearby and might take up arms. just because it s stuff that you said publicly, by the way, doesn t mean the doj can t use it in court, and that s something this indictment makes really clear. yeah, and you made such, you know, a series of really good valid points there. i did want to go back to this one sound byte of roads speaking on, i believe it was january the 4th or 5th of what he called the nuclear option on steve bannen s show. we have men stationed already outside dc as a nuclear option in case they attempt to remove the president illegally, we will stop it, so got good men on the ground already. did recon there last week, sorting out where we ll be staging. inside dc, also outside of dc armed, prepared to go in, if the
this allegation, of this indictment, it reads almost like a guide book or like a map to what happened on january 6 and to why that day became so horrifically violent, it s a miniature look at who people in the justice department alleged planned for this attack, lied at the time, perpetrated on purpose for the political reason of overturning the election outcome. there s so much in this document that is really, really interesting. one thing that i found particularly striking when i was reading over it is it details how rhodes spent $40,000 from december 30th until january 19th on guns, ammunition and other military-related items. that s a lot of money for starters and the indictment doesn t make clear where that money came from, a lot of money in a short period of time. what s particularly interesting is at least half of that 40 grand, rhodes spent after
january 6. this seditious right this conspiracy as laid out in the indictment, doj is presenting it as something that continued after the attack was completed, after the attackers failed to reach their stated goal of blocking the certification of the electoral college and that really draws, helps understand why the capitol building was so millmilitaryized, the level of security at the capitol that day seemed dramatic but the fact you have someone like steward rhodes continuing to stock up on guns and ammunition after this, staying in touch with fellow coconspeareters on efforts to block election results shows officials why to be concerned. it s interesting you see from rhodes attorney, that he would say there is no evidence,
the weekend. i read something and thought the same thing. i thought i recall vividly the polling years ago when they asked people, well, what about coverage for preexisting conditions? everyone is like yeah, it s a great idea. it s a great idea. and then you mention it s obama care, it s like it s terrible. it s a terrible idea. same trap. they re falling into it again. i know the veteran democrats up on the hill are saying my god, this is like a flashback. i m watching it again. we have to turn about. they re losing the politics of it. that s the important part. john, thank you. always enjoy the punch bowl newsletter. keep it coming. just two days after a judge put a hold on that restrictive texas abortion law, an appeals court has reinstated it. we re going to break down the latest in that legal fight next. .