to be here by null and void, because the governor was out of town. earlier this year, miss mcgeachin participated in a white supremacist conference, where attendees cheered on vladimir putin for invading ukraine. she s also, as you probably guessed by, now an enthusiastic election denier. the reason i m telling all, this is because tomorrow that lieutenant governor, janice mcgeachin is going to take on her boss, the governor brad little in the idaho republican primary for governor. naturally, because she s a election denier, she earned the lead endorsement of former president donald trump. she s not the only right wing election denier running for statewide office in idaho, there s no incumbent in the secretary of state and idaho, to the three republican candidates for running to be secretary of state, or also election, deniers who said that trump won the election, and biden is an usurper. the republican attorney general is also being primaried by another election denier. i know there s
preparing for future operations and violence. one oath keeper sent a message to this group that they should adopt tactics similar to the north vietnamese army during the vietnam war. he wrote, we ve been organizing a bugout plan if the usurper is installed. something like 20-plus oath keep rs going to kentucky mountains on hundreds of acres apparently. like the north vietnamese army and network tunnels. suggesting that this wasn t and maybe isn t over, what worries you when you see this kind of plotting? yeah. i m concerned about future attacks. but what i think is most troublesome is the fact that these groups, they now enjoy a level of mainstream legitimacy afforded to them by donald trump and many of his political supporters. these are groups enjoying support from members of law enforcement, the military, and
that in as well? laura, we actually believe from our reporting yesterday, this was a key piece that took this from a conspiracy charge to a seditious conspiracy charge. what happened after january 6. what we know is the feds, they realized that these people, they found evidence these people got together to celebrate after january 6, that night. and then started talking about what to do next. that rhodes was spending thousands of dollars, almost $20,000 on guns, equipment, the whole way up until january 20th, which was the inauguration. and that another person in this group allegedly was talking about, you know, if we can t do this, we need to go to the kentucky mountains and retreat as the oath keepers so that we can figure out how to stop, in her words, the usurper. michael, it s two years since the attack on the capitol. a lot of people had been saying, where are the conspiracy charges? where is the seditious conspiracy here? they ve now done it. what do you think this means for
going to the mountains and and starting a, i guess, civil war 2.0 if the usurper took office on january 20th. and this is a rare charge, speaking of civil war. it comes from the civil war. that is when seditious conspiracy charge dates from, originally. and the last time it was filed was against members of a michigan militia. that was in 2010. now, they were eventually acquitted. but it was a militia. you know, sort of a domestic-terror type situation. similar to this, in that in that narrow regard. does that concern you? th their acquittal? no, i mean, i think that january 6th is a a by the way, thank you for having me um, january 6th is an event like no other in our lifetimes. this is a very serious statute intended probably as much as anything to prevent things from happening that most people would would think probably never would happen. and then we have january 6th
defend the constitution, these folks are trained in military activity and their oath is to defend their own particular version of the constitution which sees the president as a usurper and that is so they justify the actions that they took to trade to prevent his taking office. took to trade to prevent his takin: office. ~ ., ., taking office. when asked about this before. taking office. when asked about this before, the taking office. when asked about this before, the people - this before, the people actually entered the capital moment which he did not, had gone off mission were not acting on his orders. that is one defence, but if you look at previous cases that have been brought against malicious and groups like this in the past. they are difficult to convict in terms ofjury trials. for the reason be for that? i think it is a function the reason be for that? i think it is a function of the reason be for that? i think it is a function of how - the reason be for that? i think