WASHINGTON (AP) 鈥 Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio wasn't even in Washington when members of his extremist group, angry over Donald Trump 's election loss, stormed the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. Yet federal prosecutors, using his words, won a conviction on the most serious charge levied in the insurrection.
The of Tarrio and three lieutenants handed down Thursday 鈥 after a contentious and erratic trial that lasted more than twice as long as expected 鈥 bolster the in its historic prosecution of the Capitol attack. The investigation has now led to convictions against two top extremist group leaders on a that's rarely ever brought and can be difficult to prove.
The verdicts could further embolden the Justice Department and as they dig into efforts by Trump and his allies to undo President Joe Biden鈥檚 victory.
Mostly in private, Smith's work is proceeding apace. Just last week, a federal grand jury 鈥 meeting in the same courthouse where the Proud Boys trial was held 鈥 from former Vice President Mike Pence, who has publicly described a pressure campaign by Trump aimed at getting him to halt Congress' certification of the election results.
In the Proud Boys case, prosecutors secured a conviction by relying on Jan. 6 rhetoric and a legal theory alleging that Tarrio and his lieutenants 鈥 or 鈥渢ools鈥 鈥 to supply the force necessary to carry out their plot to stop the transfer of power from Trump to Biden on Jan. 20.
Could the Justice Department follow a similar path with Trump? After all, just before the riot erupted he urged his supporters to go to the Capitol and 鈥渇ight like hell." The House committee that investigated the insurrection for 鈥渁ssisting and providing aid and comfort to an insurrection.鈥
鈥淲ho inspired them to do that? Who directed them to do that? Who was the person telling his followers to 鈥榝ight like hell鈥? Of course, that鈥檚 former President Trump,鈥 said Jimmy Gurul茅, a University of Notre Dame law professor. 鈥淗e鈥檚 not silent. He鈥檚 not oblivious to what鈥檚 going on. He鈥檚 leading the charge. He鈥檚 encouraging them to act.鈥
But some experts say the successful prosecution of the Proud Boys may not make it any easier to bring a case against Trump.
鈥淭arrio wasn鈥檛 there, but he was responsible because he was the one who was an organizer and leader,鈥 said Laurie Levenson, a former federal prosecutor now a professor at Loyola Marymount Law School. 鈥淧eople might say 鈥榃ell, wouldn't that apply to Trump?鈥 It might," she said.
鈥淏ut you have to again have the very direct evidence that Trump calling people to storm the Capitol, he was calling them to violence. And I鈥檓 not sure we have the answer to that yet, although I think the special counsel is getting closer, putting people like Mike Pence in the grand jury,鈥 she added.
Attorney General Merrick Garland alluded to the wider investigation after Tarrio's conviction, declaring, 鈥淥ur work will continue."
鈥淭oday鈥檚 verdict makes clear the Justice Department will do everything in its power to defend the American people and American democracy,鈥 Garland said.
Trump loomed large over the monthslong Proud Boys trial at the U.S. Courthouse in Washington, where the Capitol can be seen in the distance from the windows. Lawyers for one of Tarrio鈥檚 co-defendants at one point said they wanted to call the former president to the witness stand, although the idea went nowhere.
Prosecutors argued that the Proud Boys saw themselves as 鈥淭rump鈥檚 army鈥 and were prepared to do whatever it took to keep their preferred leader in power. Messages displayed throughout the trial showed Tarrio warning that the Proud Boys would become 鈥減olitical prisoners鈥 if Biden were to become president. As the riot proceeded, he gloated about his group鈥檚 role, writing in one message, 鈥淲e did this.鈥
Tarrio鈥檚 lawyers, however, sought to use Trump as part of his defense, claiming the former president was to blame and that prosecutors were trying to use Tarrio as a scapegoat for the president 鈥 an argument jurors appear to have roundly rejected.
Trump has denied inciting any violence on Jan. 6 and has argued that he was fully permitted by the First Amendment to challenge his loss to Biden.
This was the third seditious conspiracy trial stemming from the riot, which left dozens of police officers injured and sent lawmakers dashing for safety and into hiding. 鈥 the founder of the Oath Keepers, another far-right extremist group 鈥 was convicted in November, and the Justice Department in a court filing Friday recommended he be sentenced to 25 years in prison. were convicted in a second trial.
Tarrio was at a hotel in Baltimore when the chaos unfolded on Jan. 6, having been kicked out of the capital city after being on allegations that he defaced a Black Lives Matter banner. Law enforcement later said that Tarrio was picked up in part to quell potential violence.
Three Proud Boys members were convicted of the sedition charge alongside him: Ethan Nordean, Joseph Biggs and Zachary Rehl. A fifth defendant, Dominic Pezzola, was acquitted of seditious conspiracy, but convicted of other serious crimes.
It鈥檚 not clear how closely special counsel Jack Smith and his team of prosecutors were tracking the trial or taking stock of the verdicts. Smith has his own team of prosecutors 鈥 separate from Justice Department lawyers working on who are probing efforts by Trump and his allies to subvert the election results.
Since his appointment in November, Smith has cast a broad net in demanding interviews and testimony related to fundraising, Trump's rally that preceded the riot on Jan. 6, and communications between Trump associates and election officials in battleground states. Separately, Smith is investigating the presence of classified documents at Trump's Florida Mar-a-Lago estate and Trump's potential efforts to obstruct the government's work to get them back.
In Georgia on Friday, the attorney for eight Republican fake electors who signed a certificate falsely saying Trump had won the state said they had agreed to immunity deals in Georgia鈥檚 investigation into Trump鈥檚 actions.
As for the Proud Boys, George Washington University law professor Stephen Saltzburg, who used to work in the Justice Department, said he believes Thursday's verdict will have 鈥渮ero impact鈥 on Smith and his team. There hasn鈥檛 been any evidence of communications between high-ranking Trump White House officials and the Proud Boys, he noted.
鈥淚f that sort of thing does exist, then it wouldn鈥檛 matter what the jury did in this (Proud Boys) case because there would be independent evidence that other people were conspiring,鈥 Saltzburg said. 鈥淚f there鈥檚 not similar evidence involving the president and people around him, then it鈥檚 a harder case.鈥
One of the hallmarks of a conspiracy charge is that prosecutors don't have to allege a defendant took every action themselves, said Randall Eliason, another former federal prosecutor now a GW law professor.
鈥淪o someone like Tarrio doesn鈥檛 have to actually participate in the riot itself and can still be held accountable,鈥 Eliason said. 鈥淭he same is true of people in the White House鈥 and anyone else who could reasonably be considered to have been part of the conspiracy without having set foot in the Capitol, he said.
Still, Eliason downplayed the impact the verdict could have on Smith鈥檚 charging decisions, noting that it鈥檚 hardly a revelation that conspiracies can wrap up a broad range of defendants and not just direct participants.
鈥淚 wouldn鈥檛 say personally that this verdict is going to embolden him to do something he might otherwise have worried about doing,鈥 he said.
___
Richer reported from Boston. Associated Press reporter Lindsay Whitehurst in Washington contributed to this report.
For more on Donald Trump-related investigations:
