WASHINGTON — The seditious conspiracy trial involving five Proud Boys leaders began in earnest Thursday with opening statements, in which prosecutors cast the street gang as a driving force behind the insurrection at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.
Enrique Tarrio, the gang’s longtime chairman, sat in D.C. federal court with his four co-defendants — Ethan Nordean, Joseph Biggs, Zachary Rehl and Dominic Pezzola — and a small army of defense attorneys and legal aides, who were preparing to argue that the Proud Boys’ violent actions at the Capitol were both unplanned and constitutionally protected.
All five Proud Boys have pleaded not guilty to multiple charges, the most serious of which is seditious conspiracy, carrying a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison.
On Thursday, prosecutors kicked off opening statements with a primer on the Proud Boys organization, showing how the gang created a new leadership chapter following the election of President Joe Biden and began preparations for what they saw as their last stand for Donald Trump on Jan. 6.
“In the days after the election, these men began calling for action — calling for war — if their favorite candidate was not elected,” said Assistant U.S. Attorney Jason McCullough in court. He showed the jury the infamous clip of then-President Trump saying, “Proud Boys, stand back and stand by” during a presidential debate in September 2020.
“These men did not stand back, they did not stand by. Instead, they mobilized,” McCullough said. “They’d agreed to use any means necessary — including force — to stop congress from certifying the election.”
McCullough showed photos and videos of the gang’s communications and promo material surrounding the attack, showing how they rallied one another leading up to Jan. 6, and celebrated their violent exploits afterward.
He displayed a promotional video, shared by Rehl, depicting Proud Boys brutally attacking people in the street set to music, as clips of Infowars’ Alex Jones screeching and the words “Fuck Antifa” flashed on-screen. Another message, posted by Tarrio on Jan. 6, read: “Make no mistake, we did this.”
Immediately following the government’s statements, Rehl’s attorney Carmen Hernandez called for a mistrial, describing the Justice Department’s arguments as “misleading and inflammatory.” That motion was quickly denied.
At lunch recess, Biggs’ attorney John Daniel Hull told HuffPost that the DOJ’s opening statements were a “good outline of the events on Jan. 6” and contained “a few surprises,” but that he was optimistic heading into the defense’s statements. He also confirmed previous reports that Proud Boys founder Gavin McInnes could possibly be called as a character witness for his gang members on trial, despite his own documented history of calling for the Proud Boys to commit violence on behalf of the GOP.
Nordean’s lawyer, Nick Smith, was the first of five to give opening statements on behalf of the Proud Boys, setting the tone for how the defense will try to counter the government’s arguments going forward.
Smith claimed that the government would not be able to prove “beyond a reasonable doubt” that there was a plan in place prior to Jan. 6 to storm the Capitol, and therefore no grounds to convict any of them on any conspiracy charge. He claimed that the defense has access to the government’s own confidential informants, whom he said will testify that the Proud Boys didn’t conspire to storm the Capitol, and the violence that day was “herd mentality.”
Tarrio’s lawyer, Sabino Jauregui, argued similarly that Tarrio had no specific plans for the Capitol, and that the government would be “stitching together” messages and pictures to create the appearance of a conspiracy.
Jauregui attempted to deflect blame for the attack away from his client and toward Trump: “[Trump] told people that the election was stolen. Trump told them to go there on Jan. 6. He’s the one that unleashed them on the Capitol on Jan. 6 … and told them to ‘fight like hell.’ Enrique didn’t say that.”
Jauregui also lied on behalf of the Proud Boys organization, characterizing them inaccurately as merely a “drinking club” that is “all-inclusive” and “not a racist, sexist, homophobic organization.” (The Proud Boys themselves have disputed those assertions in words and actions ― they have white supremacy and political violence in their ruleset as defined by McInnes, and they continue on a sexist and homophobic campaign of violence today.)
The five Proud Boys on trial showed up wearing suits, and throughout the proceedings grinned at one another and whispered among themselves. Often Tarrio would look toward the audience, where his mother, Zuny Duarte, sat alongside other Proud Boys supporters.
Also in the audience this week was Randy Ireland, a former Proud Boys chapter leader from New York who was recently removed from the courtroom in another Jan. 6 case after he shouted at former Metropolitan Police Officer Michael Fanone in court, calling him a “piece of shit.” Ireland was holding a notepad bearing a Proud Boys insignia, and told HuffPost on Wednesday he was there to write news stories in support of the gang, whom he described as his “brothers.”
The high-profile case could shed new light on the attack at the Capitol, and deep-rooted connections between the Proud Boys, their extremist allies, and top-level GOP and law enforcement officials.
Multiple Proud Boys are expected to provide testimony in the case, including the defendants themselves and others who have taken plea deals that obligate them to testify against their own. Two Proud Boys — Charles Donohoe and Jeremy Bertino — previously pleaded guilty to conspiracy and seditious conspiracy, respectively, in deals to cooperate with the government.
