Enrique Tarrio is raging online about President Joe Biden’s election victory. It’s November 2020, a couple of months before the January 6 insurrection.
But Tarrio isn’t just an angry Donald Trump supporter posting on the internet. He’s the leader of the right-wing Proud Boys group with perhaps thousands of members ultimately reporting to him.
He wanted Mr Trump to remain in office, warning of a second civil war. So he and others hatched a plan, one that culminated in the storming of the Capitol on 6 January 2021.
A series of documents and messages, revealed by prosecutors at trial, shows the lengths they went to: from secret text chains to planning 50-man teams to occupy buildings in the capital.
Tarrio and his associate Ethan Nordean, another senior Proud Boy, will now be sentenced today after being found guilty of seditious conspiracy, a rare charge carrying up to 20 years in prison.
Two others – Joseph Biggs and Zachary Rehl – will be sentenced tomorrow for the same charge.
Sky News reveals below exactly how the four men planned to overthrow democracy and asks a key question: are the Proud Boys still a threat?
Advertisement
Trump: ‘Proud Boys, stand back, and stand by’
Formed during the alt-right explosion of 2016, the exclusively-male Proud Boys regard themselves as “Western chauvinists” who “refuse to apologise for creating the modern world”.
Variously described as a street gang, a hate group or “kids who were picked last at kickball”, the Proud Boys have been designated as a terror group in two countries – Canada and New Zealand.
The group’s roots are as a “boys drinking club”, Katherine Keneally, an expert on political violence at the Institute for Strategic Dialogue, tells Sky News.
“But what we saw, especially with the emergence of Trump, is this shifted from it being a drinking club to them going out on the streets, particularly at COVID-related protests, racial justice protests, and engaging in violence with protesters.”
As the movement grew, dozens of chapters of the Proud Boys sprang up in the majority of US states.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:59
Trump to Proud Boys: ‘Stand back, and stand by’
The watershed moment came in September 2020, and the infamous line from Trump live on television: “Proud Boys, stand back and stand by.”
This caused an immediate shift in their behaviour, Ms Keneally says, with the group emboldened by the belief that they had support from the President.
“They had already been garnering public support leading up to January 6, and that helped them translate to them actually directing people unaffiliated with the Proud Boys during the insurrection.”
“They viewed themselves as the president’s own military in some respects,” she added.
The plan for January 6
“Fill the buildings with patriots and communicate our demands,” the plan says.
This is the incendiary ‘1776 Returns’ document, a secret Proud Boys internal plan prosecutors say was sent to Tarrio.
Its stated goals include maintaining control “over a select few, but crucial buildings in the DC area for a set period of time” and getting as “many people as possible inside these buildings”.
“These are OUR buildings, they are just renting space,” the document reads. “We must show our politicians We the People are in charge.”
The document set out plans in detail for how Proud Boys would occupy buildings, with specialist roles given to leads (“covert sleeper”), “hypeman” and “recruiter”.
“Have leads and seconds open the doors for the crowd to enter,” it says. “This might include causing trouble near the front doors to distract guards who may be holding the doors off.”
Readers are instructed to use COVID-19 to their advantage by wearing face coverings to protect their identities.
Prosecutors say that Tarrio was sent the 1776 Returns document by an unnamed individual, who told him: “The revolution is more important than anything.”
Tarrio responded: “That’s what every waking moment consists of… I’m not playing games.”
What happened at the Proud Boys trial?
Tarrio, Nordean, Biggs and Rehl along with a fifth defendant, Dominic Pezzola, were put on trial charged with conspiring to oppose the lawful transfer of presidential power by force (seditious conspiracy) and a number of other charges in relation to January 6.
In his 80-minute opening statement, assistant US attorney Jason McCullough said in the days after the 2020 election the defendants had started “calling for action, calling for war, if their favoured candidate was not elected.”
Alluding to Mr Trump’s remark, the prosecutor added: “They did not stand back. They did not stand by. Instead, they mobilised.”
The indictment laid out how Tarrio, enraged at President Biden’s victory, posted on social media in November 2020: “F*** unity. No quarter. Raise the black flag.”
Associated with military conflict, the phrase ‘no quarter’ suggests that enemy combatants should be killed rather than taken prisoner.
The jury heard how after the election Tarrio posted on social media that the presidency was being stolen and vowed his group wouldn’t “go quietly”.
Mr McCullough also cited messages from Tarrio on January 6, including: “Make no mistake… We did this.”
“Those are his words, his thoughts, just minutes after Congress had been forced to stop its work,” McCullough said. “They did what they’d set out to do.”
And while Tarrio himself wasn’t at the Capitol on the day of the insurrection, he messaged with members throughout the riot, prosecutors said.
‘Their commander-in-chief sold them a lie’
Defence lawyers denied their clients planned or led an attack on the Capitol and suggested they were being targeted for their political beliefs.
Tarrio’s attorney, Sabino Jauregui, told jurors his client was being made a scapegoat because he “wrote and sent a lot of offensive things”.
“Speaking what you think is not illegal in this country yet,” he continued, before he closed with a quote from Martin Luther King Jr: “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.”
Rehl’s lawyer, Carmen Hernandez, said her client came to the nation’s capital simply to protest. “I submit to you that Mr Rehl came to DC to exercise his First Amendment rights,” she told the jury.
Nick Smith, a lawyer for Nordean, who led a Proud Boys chapter in Washington state, told jurors they would see no evidence of a “complicated, long-running plot”.
“What you will see in the Telegram chats is a bunch of text messages that are tempting you to find guilt based on your dislike of these people,” he said. “Do not take the bait.”
Norm Pattis, a lawyer for Joe Biggs, said the defendants came to Washington because their “commander-in-chief” told them it would “be wild”, referring to Mr Trump’s infamous tweet that called on supporters to come to Washington on January 6.
“Their commander-in-chief sold them a lie,” he said.
Pezzola’s lawyer, Roger Roots, downplayed the attack on the Capitol, which temporarily halted the counting of Electoral College ballots.
“Believe it or not, this entire case is about a six-hour delay of Congress,” Roots told the jury. “The government makes a big deal out of this six-hour recess.”
Guilty of seditious conspiracy
Tarrio, Biggs, Nordean and Rehl were found guilty of seditious conspiracy and conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding.
Pezzola was cleared of seditious conspiracy and a jury could not reach an agreement on the charge of conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding.
Pezzola, who was caught on video smashing in a window with a Capitol Police shield during the riot, was separately charged with stealing the police shield and found guilty.
He was also convicted of assaulting, resisting or impeding certain officers, while the four other defendants were acquitted on that charge.
The judge declared a mistrial in respect of various other counts in the trial upon which the jury did not reach conclusions.
How big are the Proud Boys now?
With the next US presidential election barely a year away some are asking if we are likely to see a repeat of the violent scenes of January 6… or another attempt to overturn the result if Mr Trump is not the victor.
Are the Proud Boys still a threat to American democracy?
Their numbers have grown dramatically since 2020, reaching 78 chapters in 2022, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center organisation.
But that may not tell the whole story, as it does not necessarily mean that the number of Proud Boys members has increased, experts say.
“I think many would have expected the Proud Boys to kind of fade away by now,” Colin P Clarke, director of research and an expert on domestic terrorism at the Soufan Group, tells Sky News.
“But there seems to be a real sense of pride in pushing forward with all their different activities, and they’ve positioned themselves as a player in the culture wars more broadly.”
However Colin Beck, a professor at Pomona College and an expert in social movements, said that while the Proud Boys brand may have continued to spread, the amount of support may have decreased.
“There’s now a real cost,” he tells Sky News. “If you go to a Proud Boys event you might end up in jail.
“The US federal government is very good at suppressing protests when it chooses to do so.”
Trump ‘abandoned’ the Proud Boys
Another factor, Katherine Keneally says, is the Proud Boys have in many ways distanced themselves from Mr Trump and feel “betrayed” by him.
She pointed to fears of Proud Boys protests over the indictment of the former president which did not come to pass.
“He wasn’t helping fund their legal efforts. He just sort of abandoned them,” she said. “So there has been this distrust that’s been happening with Trump.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:39
Watch US Justice Department special counsel Jack Smith’s statement here.
Asked about the future, she doubts there will be a repeat of January 6 as Proud Boys are now focussing much more on local action and running for local office.
“I’m not actually worried about the Proud Boys,” Ms Beck says. “In some ways they’re like the has-beens.”
“It’s who the Proud Boys become next…what is the group that emerges?
“Because all the people who are adherents or sympathetic, they don’t go away. They just move on to something else.”
Mr Clarke raised the idea the Proud Boys could act as a “feeder” or “preparatory school” for more extreme groups.
Asked how likely a repeat of the Capitol insurrection is if a Democrat wins in 2024, Mr Clarke said: “We have to learn from January 6 that when these guys say that they’re going to do something, we have to take them seriously and prepare for it.”
Donald Trump needs to choose a running mate for the 2024 election, and rumour has it he’s treating it like his old TV show: The Apprentice.
After a rather high-profile falling out with Mike Pence, the Republican nominee is deciding who could be his next vice president.
He is expected to reveal his choice at the Republican National Convention next month.
Let’s take a look at who the candidates are… and why each of one might hear those famous words: “You’re hired!”.
Doug Burgum
North Dakota Governor Doug Burgum hoped his small-town values would appeal to Republican voters enough to choose him as the presidential nominee. It didn’t work, but does it make him an appealing pick for VP?
The 67-year-old former software company executive has stressed his humble origins and previously said the next US president should be “someone who’s held jobs where you shower at the end of the day, not at the beginning”.
More on Donald Trump
Related Topics:
You’re hired: Burgum might be a safe pair of hands due to his experience in the worlds of politics and business, and his independent wealth (north of $100m) could be useful campaign funds.
You’re fired:North Dakota is as red as they come, so picking Burgum doesn’t come with the advantage of moving the dial in a swing state.
Advertisement
Marco Rubio
One of Florida’s two Republican senators, Marco Rubio is the son of Cuban immigrants who fled to Miami during the Batista dictatorship.
He ran for the Republican presidential nomination in 2016 but dropped out after losing the Florida primary to Trump, who relentlessly mocked him as “Little Marco”.
You’re hired: He brings strong foreign policy credentials, having served on the Senate Foreign Relations and Intelligence committees, and has a track record of attracting Latino voters.
You’re fired: Rubio has drawn criticism from the MAGA (Make America Great Again) movement in the past for his immigration reform legislation which could pose a problem for him, even though he has since renounced his own deal. There’s also the wrinkle that the US constitution appears to possibly prohibit Electoral College electors from voting for inhabitants of their states for both president and vice president.
JD Vance
A US Marines veteran, JD Vance rose to become senator for Ohio after growing up in poverty.
He once described himself as a “never Trumper” but has since U-turned into being a reliable supporter of The Donald, even attending court in New York to support him at his hush money trial.
You’re hired: Vance aligns with Trump’s populist mindset and would likely be palatable to the MAGA base – perhaps even as a potential successor one day.
You’re fired: Ohio hasn’t voted Democrat since 2012 so appointing Vance likely doesn’t give Trump a second-in-command pick who could help get him over the line in a swing state.
Tim Scott
The only black Republican US senator, Tim Scott launched a bid to become the Republican presidential nominee but later withdrew from the race.
He has since been name-dropped by Trump himself as a possible vice presidential pick.
Scott has accused President Joe Biden and “the radical left” of “attacking every rung of the ladder that helped me climb”.
You’re hired: Scott is seen as a potential asset to Trump both on a policy front and in helping to cut Democratic margins, particularly with Black and Hispanic male voters.
You’re fired: Scott has been outspoken about his support for a federal abortion ban in the aftermath of the fall of Roe v Wade, whereas Trump has said the decision should be left to individual states.
Byron Donalds
In terms of having a similar name to Trump, Byron Donalds certainly has the edge over the other potential VP candidates.
Donalds, 45, is a congressman from Florida who has been a supporter of the former president since he entered Congress. He voted against the certification of electors from Arizona and Pennsylvania and is a 2020 election denier.
You’re hired: Donalds is a strong debater with experience on TV who could help the Trump campaign reach out to black voters.
You’re fired: Donalds has a limited national profile and could face a similar constitutional predicament as Marco Rubio as he also lives in Florida.
Elise Stefanik
A Republican congresswoman from New York, Elise Stefanik’s profile has been on the rise in the GOP (Grand Old Party) for years.
She shot to fame after her questioning of university presidents about antisemitism led to a huge outcry and fallout. In May, she addressed the Knesset in Israel and lambasted the Biden administration’s approach to its ally.
You’re hired: One of the few women thought to be on the VP shortlist, Stefanik could help shore up Trump’s support among female and suburban voters as well as bring youth to the ticket.
You’re fired: Stefanik hails from New York, a solidly blue state, so her inclusion on the ticket is unlikely to help bring more Electoral College votes to Trump’s side.
Ben Carson
Ben Carson, 72, served in Trump’s administration last time around as secretary for housing and urban development.
His time in government came after he briefly ran for the Republican nomination in 2016 before eventually pulling out of the race and endorsing Trump.
You’re hired: Carson hails from Michigan, a battleground state that is likely to be among the most crucial races to watch on election night.
You’re fired: Though well-known, if Trump is looking for an attack dog VP then Carson might not be the right candidate. He’s not considered to be the most outspoken or charismatic pick.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:44
David Cameron can ‘kiss my a**’
Less likely – Marjorie Taylor-Greene
A Republican congresswoman known for her embrace of conspiracy theories and fierce support for Trump, Marjorie Taylor-Greene nonetheless could make sense as a running mate for her political hero.
However, she is not believed to be on the list of candidates being vetted by the Trump campaign.
She was elected to Congress in 2020 and quickly became a powerful – and vocal – player in the Republican Party.
If he’s still in post after a hypothetical Trump/MTG win, it would be an awkward appointment for the UK foreign secretary, Lord Cameron, whom Taylor-Greene had choice words for…
You’re hired: Taylor-Greene is staunchly loyal to Trump and popular among the MAGA right-wing of the Republican Party.
You’re fired: She’s a divisive figure nationwide and has been criticised for her – sometimes bizarre – outbursts, including talk of “Jewish space lasers”.
Less likely – Kristi Noem
The current governor of South Dakota, Kristi Noem also has experience as a former member of Congress.
Her profile grew during the COVID-19 pandemic when she declined to close businesses and public spaces in her state to limit the spread of the virus. But it was in 2024 when she became even more well-known… after describing an incident of killing her dog in her own memoir.
As time has gone on she appears to be an increasingly unlikely choice for VP.
You’re hired: Noem brings experience as a state governor and fits in with Trump’s MAGA crowd.
You’re fired: She has been a supporter of the abortion restrictions in her state, where there is a near-total ban except when necessary to save the life of the mother. This hardline stance could make her a liability in a general election where public support for abortion access is high.
Already ruled out – Nikki Haley
Nikki Haley ran against Trump in the contest to secure the Republican nomination earlier this year. She weathered a string of defeats in various states before eventually suspending her campaign.
Nonetheless, she demonstrated that a significant proportion of Republican voters prefer her to Trump’s band of MAGA politics, perhaps setting the stage for a return in 2028 and beyond.
Trump has already ruled her out, and she’d be unlikely to accept even if he hadn’t. But just for fun:
You’re hired: She’s a strong politician with a track record of winning elections, and appeals to more moderate Republicans who might be nervous about another Trump presidency. But…
You’re fired: Haley is a critic of Trump, who she described as “unhinged” and too chaotic and divisive to be an effective president.
An eight-year-old boy is in a critical condition after he was shot in the head at a waterpark in Michigan – with eight other people injured.
His mother is also in a critical condition, while his four-year-old brother is in a stable condition with a leg wound, after a gunman opened fire in a Detroit suburb on Saturday.
Another other six victims, who are all aged 30 or over, including a husband and wife and a 78-year-old man, are said to be in a stable condition.
Police tracked the suspected gunman, described as a 42-year-old white man, to a home, where they sent a drone inside to find he had died by a self-inflicted gunshot wound, authorities said.
The shooting happened at just after 5pm at the Brooklands Plaza Splash Pad in Rochester Hills, an area of a city park where people can play in fountains of water.
Oakland County Sheriff Mike Bouchard said the attack appeared to be random, with the gunman driving up to the park, walking to the water recreation area and firing up to 28 times, stopping multiple times to reload.
“People were falling, getting hit, trying to run,” he said. “Terrible things that unfortunately all of us in our law enforcement business have seen way too much.”
More on Michigan
Related Topics:
The sheriff said the gunman, who at least one witness said was using two handguns, was “apparently in no rush” and “just calmly walked back to his car”.
An officer arrived at the scene within two minutes of the 911 call, he said, with the first deputies providing first aid including tourniquets.
Advertisement
A handgun and three empty magazines were recovered from the scene, the sheriff said.
Police were able to quickly come up with a likely address, and a car matching the suspect’s was discovered at the residence.
Sheriff Bouchard said the quick actions of police may have prevented a “second chapter” to the shooting as he showed a photo of a semiautomatic rifle on a table inside the home.
Another handgun, believed to have been used by the suspect to take his own life, was also found inside.
The suspect, who is believed to have lived with his mother, did not live in Rochester Hills and it is not yet known why he went to the park or what his motive may have been.
Rochester Hills Mayor Bryan Barnett said he “started to cry” when he arrived at the scene because it is supposed to be a place where people gather and have fun.
The shooting was a reminder “that we live in a fragile place,” he said, while Sheriff Bouchard called it “a gut punch” for the county.
“Our most fervent hope, at least at his point, is that all of the injured victims have speedy recoveries,” he said.
“None of us… anticipated going into Father’s Day weekend with this kind of tragedy that families will be deeply affected by forever.”
A woman who was a psychiatric patient when she incriminated herself in a 1980 Missouri murder has had her conviction overturned after spending 43 years behind bars.
Sandra Hemme’s lawyers say a disgraced police officer was responsible for the killing of 31-year-old library worker Patricia Jeschke and this is the longest time a woman has been imprisoned for a wrongful conviction in US history.
Judge Ryan Horsman ruled on Friday the 63-year-old had established evidence of actual innocence, said her trial counsel was ineffective and prosecutors had failed to disclose evidence that would have helped her.
He said she must be freed within 30 days unless prosecutors retry her, but her lawyers, with the New York-based Innocence Project, are seeking her immediate release.
“We are grateful to the Court for acknowledging the grave injustice Ms Hemme has endured for more than four decades,” they said in a statement, promising to keep up their efforts to dismiss the charges and reunite Hemme with her family.
The brutal killing of Ms Jeschke grabbed the headlines after her worried mother climbed through her apartment window in in St Joseph, Missouri, and found her daughter’s naked body on the floor surrounded by blood on 13 November 1980.
Her hands were tied behind her back with a telephone cord, and a pair of tights was wrapped around her throat, with a knife under her head.
Ms Hemme was shackled in leather wrist restraints and so heavily sedated she “could not hold her head up straight” or “articulate anything beyond monosyllabic responses” when she was first questioned over Ms Jeschke’s death, according to her lawyers.
Advertisement
They alleged in a petition seeking her exoneration that authorities ignored her “wildly contradictory” statements and suppressed evidence implicating Michael Holman, then a 22-year-old police officer who tried to use the murdered woman’s credit card on the day her body was found.
The judge found that “no evidence whatsoever outside of Ms Hemme’s unreliable statements connects her to the crime”.
“In contrast,” he added, “this Court finds that the evidence directly ties Holman to this crime and murder scene.”
Holman, who had been a suspect and was questioned at the time, was fired after investigations for burglary and insurance fraud, and died in 2015.