conspiracy charge

<div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">---</div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">prolly belated but triggered by JOK hidden video [tho bar not mtg] given to cops</div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">see eco terror, crit infra?</div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">shac 7?  veggie libel?</div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">=</div><div style="font-size: small;"><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); font-size: medium;">=</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); font-size: medium;"><a href="https://www.desmog.com/2022/10/07/slapp-lawsuits-exxon-chemrisk-dapl-climate-change-raskin/">
</a></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); font-size: medium;"><a href="https://www.desmog.com/2022/10/07/slapp-lawsuits-exxon-chemrisk-dapl-climate-change-raskin/">https://www.desmog.com/2022/10/07/slapp-lawsuits-exxon-chemrisk-dapl-climate-change-raskin/</a></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); font-size: medium;">
</div><div style="font-size: medium;"> Emily SandersIn 2018, Krystal Two Bulls received notice that she was being sued for criminal conspiracy.Two Bulls, who is Oglala Lakota and North Cheyenne, has been organizing for environmental justice for much of her life. She was raised on the North Cheyenne Indian Reservation of Lame Deer, Montana, part of a community that had resisted coal developments for nearly 40 years. In 2016, she helped defeat Arch Coal’s plans to build a massive strip mining operation on the reservation’s border. The project would’ve been one of the largest coal mines in the United States. Later that same year, Two Bulls received an urgent call for assistance from land and water protectors at Standing Rock, North Dakota, who were working to oppose the construction of the <a href="https://www.desmog.com/energy-transfer-partners-bakken-oil-pipeline-through-iowa/" data-wpel-link="internal" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: none;">Dakota Access pipeline</a>, which transports crude oil from North Dakota to Illinois.When Two Bulls arrived, the conflict between protestors and local police was escalating. Her auntie, Dr. Sara Jumping Eagle, had <a href="https://www.democracynow.org/2016/10/18/standing_rock_sioux_pediatrician_threat_from" data-wpel-link="external" target="blank" rel="external noopener noreferrer" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: none;">recently been arrested</a> after standing in the path of a bulldozer set to dig up human remains at an ancestral burial site. Two Bulls spent three-and-a-half months supporting and sustaining the camp — handling basic logistics like providing protestors with food, warm clothing, and other necessities — all in the face of <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/nov/29/standing-rock-protest-north-dakota-shutdown-evacuation" data-wpel-link="external" target="blank" rel="external noopener noreferrer" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: none;">violence</a> by state police. She then helped to launch the <a href="https://nodaplsolidarity.org/" data-wpel-link="external" target="blank" rel="external noopener noreferrer" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: none;">No DAPL Solidarity Campaign</a>, a global movement to back the Indigenous opposition to the pipeline. It wasn’t until a year after camp was shut down that Two Bulls, who came to North Dakota on her own dime and left in debt, found out she was being sued for millions of dollars by the pipeline developer, Energy Transfer Partners. The charges were brought under the Racketeering Influenced Corrupt Practices (RICO) Act, a law originally designed to prosecute the mafia. The company claimed that through her “calls to action,” including a statement on Greenpeace’s website asking “all people from around the world to take action” and “come stand with us” against the Dakota Access pipeline, Two Bulls and others had conspired to interfere with Energy Transfer’s business operations and engaged in organized crime. The individuals and groups’ opposition, the company claimed, was defamatory and cost key investments in its pipeline.In 2017, The Intercept reported on documents leaked from former personnel at an international security firm, TigerSwan, revealing that Energy Transfer had <a href="https://theintercept.com/2017/11/15/dakota-access-pipeline-dapl-tigerswan-energy-transfer-partners-rico-lawsuit/" data-wpel-link="external" target="blank" rel="external noopener noreferrer" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: none;">paid the firm</a> to use military-style surveillance and infiltration tactics to gather information that could be deployed in a RICO lawsuit against the anti-pipeline activists. Two Bulls is just one of many victims of the fossil fuel industry’s use of SLAPPs — strategic lawsuits against public participation — to silence and intimidate its critics. <a href="https://earthrights.org/publication/the-fossil-fuel-industrys-use-of-slapps-and-judicial-harassment-in-the-united-states/" data-wpel-link="external" target="blank" rel="external noopener noreferrer" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: none;">A report</a> released last month by legal advocacy nonprofit EarthRights International identified 152 instances of <a href="https://exxonknews.substack.com/p/steven-donziger-on-freedom-under" data-wpel-link="external" target="blank" rel="external noopener noreferrer" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: none;">legal and judicial harassment</a> by fossil fuel corporations to suppress dissent in the United States over the past 10 years, including 93 SLAPP lawsuits. Just this week, a California oil industry trade association <a href="https://biologicaldiversity.org/w/news/press-releases/california-oil-group-pays-fees-to-advocacy-groups-it-harassed-but-dodges-multimillion-dollar-judgment-2022-10-03/#.YzyAqGbeG24.twitter" data-wpel-link="external" target="blank" rel="external noopener noreferrer" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: none;">paid nearly $650,000 in fees</a> to the city of Los Angeles and several environmental advocacy groups the company <a href="https://www.desmog.com/2017/04/03/youth-color-lawsuit-los-angeles-drilling-discrimination-oil-industry/" data-wpel-link="internal" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: none;">had targeted in court for years</a> following the city’s implementation of new environmental safety requirements for drilling applicants. After declaring bankruptcy, the California Independent Petroleum Association was allowed to pay only a fraction of a judgment initially awarded to the city and groups by a trial court that ruled the lawsuit was a SLAPP.“With the strengthening of our movements, the revelation of how long the fossil fuel industry has been aware of how their practices impact and contribute to climate change, and the rise of legal cases against oil and gas corporations, these companies are becoming more desperate to silence the voices of their critics,” said Deepa Padmanabha, deputy general counsel at Greenpeace USA.  A wide range of concerned groups, from community organizers to members of Congress, are taking up the fight against SLAPPs. Last month, the House Oversight Subcommittee on Civil Rights and Civil Liberties <a href="https://oversight.house.gov/legislation/hearings/free-speech-under-attack-part-iii-the-legal-assault-on-environmental-activists" data-wpel-link="external" target="blank" rel="external noopener noreferrer" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: none;">held a hearing</a> to expose the fossil fuel industry’s use of SLAPPs and its backing of <a href="https://www.desmog.com/2017/12/11/alec-model-bill-pipeline-protesters/" data-wpel-link="internal" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: none;">bills to criminalize protest</a>. The committee’s witnesses, including Padmanabha and others, explained that corporations were using these tactics to suppress activists’ ability to freely voice dissent.The day after the hearing, Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD), the subcommittee chairman, introduced the <a href="https://raskin.house.gov/cache/files/f/b/fbb6b8d1-fa69-4c17-adbb-6445ff63b8a0/291D1533375A72AC20E4EB67F9244109.bill-text---slapp-protection-act.pdf" data-wpel-link="external" target="blank" rel="external noopener noreferrer" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: none;">SLAPP Protection Act of 2022</a> — the first federal legislation that would “establish a procedure to dismiss, punish, and deter strategic lawsuits against public participation.” Advocates say the bill could create a sorely needed protection for individuals and community groups who speak out against fossil fuel infrastructure, and an important safeguard for free speech at large.According to EarthRights International, the proposed legislation <a href="https://earthrights.org/an-in-depth-look-at-raskin-federal-anti-slapp-legislation/" data-wpel-link="external" target="blank" rel="external noopener noreferrer" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: none;">would provide</a> a federal mechanism for SLAPP suits to be quickly identified and dismissed while balancing the rights of plaintiffs and defendants. The bill would also force those bringing SLAPP suits to pay their opponents’ legal fees if the lawsuit is proven to have abusive intent. Advocacy organizations are also tackling the issue. EarthRights is a member of the <a href="https://protecttheprotest.org/" data-wpel-link="external" target="blank" rel="external noopener noreferrer" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: none;">Protect the Protest</a> coalition, an initiative created in response to the rise of SLAPP suits. “If a corporation can sue a nonprofit organization out of business for criticizing its activities, then that’s extremely dangerous,” Kirk Herbertson, senior policy advisor at EarthRights International, said. About a year after Energy Transfer filed its lawsuit against Two Bulls and others, a district court judge in North Dakota <a href="https://www.desmog.com/2019/02/14/energy-transfer-racketeering-claims-greenpeace-dakota-access-pipeline-dismissed/" data-wpel-link="internal" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: none;">dismissed the case</a>, denying the RICO claims with prejudice — meaning the company could not refile those claims. RICO claims, which can triple the amount of damages sought in a SLAPP suit, can be financially devastating — even for a larger, well-resourced organization like Greenpeace USA, which was named in the original suit. While Energy Transfer’s RICO claims against the organization have been dismissed, the pipeline company filed a second lawsuit in North Dakota state court, which is scheduled for trial in June 2023. In its current case, which also names Two Bulls as a defendant, Energy Transfer argues that Greenpeace USA conspired with others to defame, trespass, and interfere with business relationships, among many other charges. Energy Transfer did not respond to a request for comment. “Companies are becoming more desperate to silence the voices of their critics”– Deepa PadmanabhaFighting these lawsuits not only takes vast amounts of money, but also time and energy. Padmanabha said that since mid-2016, her career has been almost entirely dedicated to advocating against corporate lawfare — corporations’ use of the legal system to attack opponents — preventing her from engaging more in the dire work needed to prevent climate catastrophe. “The next decade is so critical in our fight against climate change. And if we didn’t have to deal with these lawsuits, we would really be putting every penny and every minute we have into fighting the existential threat of climate change,” Padmanabha said, adding that they are also intended to intimidate and deter individuals and lesser-resourced, smaller groups from speaking out.Karen Savage was working in Massachusetts as a middle-school math teacher when she got hit with a SLAPP suit. In 2013, she and another environmental activist, Cherri Foytlin, wrote an <a href="https://www.huffpost.com/entry/chemrisk-bp-and-purple-st_b_4095131" data-wpel-link="external" target="blank" rel="external noopener noreferrer" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: none;">unpaid article</a> for the Huffington Post about a so-called independent study from scientific consulting firm ChemRisk. The study had claimed that there was no connection between chemicals released during the BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill and the serious health problems reported by cleanup workers and coastal residents in its aftermath. As their reporting revealed, ChemRisk — a company with a long history of working with polluters, including defendant PG&E in the infamous Erin Brockovich case — produced “science” on behalf of BP that the oil major could use to defend itself from liability in court.After the article was published, the Huffington Post <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/12/business/energy-environment/years-after-criticism-of-its-practices-science-consultant-pushes-back.html" data-wpel-link="external" target="blank" rel="external noopener noreferrer" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: none;">received</a> an immediate request from the company to retract it, which they forwarded on to Cherri Foytlin. (In a note on her Facebook page, Foytlin told ChemRisk to “kiss my derriere.”)Foytlin’s Facebook post, along with many other social media posts from the two writers, appeared in a defamation suit filed against them by ChemRisk in New York state. The company claimed their article contained falsehoods — though, according to Savage, ChemRisk couldn’t explain what those falsehoods were — and that as long as it was kept online, the article would “continue to do substantial harm to ChemRisk’s reputation.” “Basically what they wanted to do was shut us up,” Savage told me. “It was an intimidation tactic.” With pro-bono representation, Savage and Foytlin were able to get the suit dismissed in New York. Within two weeks, the company refiled in Massachusetts, where Savage lived. At one point, she said, the company’s lawyers even attempted to serve her in her classroom while she was teaching.Cardno ChemRisk, the parent company of ChemRisk, did not respond to a request for comment.The case was eventually dismissed under the state’s anti-SLAPP laws, and ChemRisk was forced to pay Savage and Foytlin’s attorney’s fees. Savage said she believes that ChemRisk never sued them in Louisiana, where Foytlin lived, because of the three states, Louisiana’s anti-SLAPP laws were the strongest, and the suit would’ve been dismissed faster and with greater consequences for the company. That tactic of searching for the most favorable court, called forum shopping, is something Raskin’s anti-SLAPP statute would address by creating a standard applicable across the United States. At present, <a href="https://anti-slapp.org/your-states-free-speech-protection" data-wpel-link="external" target="blank" rel="external noopener noreferrer" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: none;">32 states</a> and the District of Columbia have anti-SLAPP laws, yet they have varying degrees of efficacy. And while the fate of a federal bill could depend on the outcome of midterm elections, most state anti-SLAPP laws have passed with bipartisan support.Savage — who has since become a journalist and has<a href="https://www.desmog.com/2021/10/12/karen-savage-journalist-louisiana-trespassing-bayou-bridge/" data-wpel-link="internal" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: none;"> written for DeSmog</a> about being arrested by pipeline security while reporting — said she hopes Raskin’s bill would help put an end to this tactic. “If you know the truth, and you’ve got factual backup, and someone comes at you, you can’t back down on that,” Savage said. “The whole reason they’re coming at you is because they also know that you have the truth.”While the fossil fuel industry works to stamp out the speech of environmental advocates on the one hand, it is now arguing that its climate denial is protected speech on the other. At the same time that Raskin held his hearing into the fossil fuel industry’s assault on the First Amendment, the House Natural Resources Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee held a separate hearing to examine how public relations firms market climate disinformation and delay action on behalf of Big Oil. In that hearing, chaired by Rep. Katie Porter (D-CA), Republicans and their witness argued that the committee was attacking the corporations’ right to free speech. “Taken together, the two [hearings] are a perfect illustration of the industry’s First Amendment strategy: expand free speech for corporations, curb it for citizens,” Amy Westervelt recently <a href="https://theintercept.com/2022/09/16/fossil-fuel-industry-climate-free-speech/" data-wpel-link="external" target="blank" rel="external noopener noreferrer" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: none;">wrote</a> in The Intercept. The fossil fuel industry, she explained, has been developing the argument that its public statements on climate policy are protected speech since the late 1960s, all while working to expand the right of corporations to buy influence over politics behind the scenes.In a paradoxical twist, fossil fuel companies are even attempting to wield existing anti-SLAPP laws to shield themselves from legal accountability. After a Massachusetts court ruled that Attorney General Maura Healey’s climate fraud lawsuit against Exxon could proceed in state court, the oil giant told the state’s supreme court that the case was actually a conspiracy to silence Exxon’s views on climate policy in violation of the state’s anti-SLAPP statute. But so far, the idea that Exxon’s fraud is protected free speech <a href="https://exxonknews.substack.com/p/exxons-free-speech-defense-just-got?s=w" data-wpel-link="external" target="blank" rel="external noopener noreferrer" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: none;">has not gone over well with judges</a>. “We have seen that the industry is trying to build up this argument around a conspiracy against them, and it’s coming up in things like anti-SLAPP motions in courts. But they have continued to fail in that effort so far,” Herbertson of EarthRights International said. Raskin’s newly proposed federal legislation, he said, is clearly and explicitly designed to be used by real people and organizations that have been victim to SLAPP suits, and will be harder for corporations to use in their own defense.But if you ask Padmanabha of Greenpeace, the industry’s tactics are on thin ice. “There is this recognition and an increasing awareness that speech should not be bought,” she said. “And I think that the [Oversight Civil Rights and Civil Liberties] hearing and the bill that followed it are really just emblematic examples of how these attempts to control the narrative are crumbling.”Emily Sanders writes <a href="http://exxonknews.org/" data-wpel-link="external" target="blank" rel="external noopener noreferrer" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: none;">ExxonKnews</a>, a newsletter covering climate accountability and the oil and gas industry. She is editorial lead at the Center for Climate Integrity, and is based in New York City. This piece was co-published by <a href="https://www.desmog.com/" target="blank" rel="noreferrer noopener" data-wpel-link="internal" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: none;">DeSmog</a> and <a href="http://exxonknews.org/" target="blank" rel="noreferrer noopener external" data-wpel-link="external" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: none;">ExxonKnews</a>, a project of the <a href="https://climateintegrity.org/" data-wpel-link="external" target="_blank" rel="external noopener noreferrer" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: none;">Center for Climate Integrity</a>.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); font-size: medium;"></div></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">to get back in djt good graces?<a href="https://www.alternet.org/2020/09/florida-gov-desantis-just-proposed-a-dangerous-bill-to-imperil-and-silence-protesters/">https://www.alternet.org/2020/09/florida-gov-desantis-just-proposed-a-dangerous-bill-to-imperil-and-silence-protesters/</a>no lnx twt docs
florida Gov. DeSantis just proposed a dangerous bill to imperil and silence protestersWritten by Brett Wilkins / Common Dreams September 21, 2020The American Civil Liberties Union joined Florida Democrats on Monday in condemning a proposed bill by Gov. Ron DeSantis that would newly classify certain forms of protest as felonies and impose harsh penalties on some protesters.Flanked by Republican lawmakers and law enforcement officials at an afternoon press conference in Winter Haven, DeSantis referred to Black Lives Matter protests in Portland, Oregon as he announced the proposed legislation.“I look at what goes on in Portland. They’ll have people, they’ll arrest them,” DeSantis said. “They’re all scraggly-looking Antifa-types. They get their mugshot taken, then they get released. It’s like a carousel; on and on it goes.”“That’s not going to happen in here in Florida,” the governor vowed.The “Combatting Violence, Disorder, and Looting and Law Enforcement Protection Act” would make it a felony to “obstruct traffic during an unpermitted protest,” while absolving motorists of liability for “injury or death caused if fleeing for safety from a mob.” It would also make it a felony for anyone gathered in a group of seven or more people “to cause damage to property or injury to other persons,” or to “destroy public property” or topple monuments. Jailed protesters will not be granted bail until at least their first court appearance.The proposed bill levies mandatory minimum prison sentences for striking law enforcement officers, including with projectiles, and contains an enhancement for throwing objects that strike officers or civilians, and for out-of-state protesters who even participate in a demonstration that turns violent.Furthermore, the measure attaches Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) liability to “anyone who organizes or funds a violent or disorderly assembly.” It also contains provisions barring state grants to municipalities that defund police, and terminates state benefits to anyone “convicted of participating in a violent or disorderly assembly.”State Democratic leaders decried the governor’s proposed bill. “The governor is attaching himself to [President] Donald Trump’s propaganda and manufacturing a non-existent law and order crisis in Florida,” said state Senate Democratic Leader Audrey Gibson. “It’s political fear-mongering to bolster a president’s re-election bid.”“Non-violent protest has been a critical and basic principle of this nation, and has repeatedly changed the course of history for the better,” said state Sen. Bobby Powell. “The governor’s proposal has nothing to do with safeguarding that right. This crackdown is just that—a government sledgehammer to permanently silence opposing voices.”“The governor could not name a single city, a single town, or a single community in Florida that was the victim of violent protests, because there has been none,” said state Sen. Perry Thurston. “The governor is attempting to link calls for justice to calls for anarchy, without any evidence to support such a claim.”“This is using a problem from somewhere else to strip the liberty of people in this state to voice their constitutional right to peacefully dissent,” added Thurston. “And it’s the latest in a long line of efforts to quash the people’s ability to demand change when the government refuses to listen.”The ACLU of Florida also condemned the proposed legislation.“Gov. DeSantis’ proposal is undemocratic and hostile to Americans’ shared values,” said Micah Kubic, executive director of the ACLU of Florida. “This effort has one goal: silence, criminalize, and penalize Floridians who want to see justice for Black lives lost to racialized violence and brutality at the hands of law enforcement.”According to the U.S. Crisis Monitor—a joint project between the Armed Conflict Location and Event Data Project (ACLED) and the Bridging Divides Initiative at Princeton University—over 93% of this year’s racial justice protests have been peaceful.DeSantis’ proposed bill came on the same day that the U.S. Department of Justice designated New York City, Seattle, and Portland—where anti-racism demonstrations continued 119 days after the Minneapolis police killing of George Floyd—as “anarchist jurisdictions.”</div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">see deploraball  stink bomb not made explicit</div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20170309065644/https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/protester-pleads-guilty-to-conspiring-to-disrupt-deploraball-for-trump-supporters/2017/03/07/3f55f3da-0347-11e7-b1e9-a05d3c21f7cf_story.html?utm_term=.a4e29e437551" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none;">https://web.archive.org/web/20170309065644/https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/protester-pleads-guilty-to-conspiring-to-disrupt-deploraball-for-trump-supporters/2017/03/07/3f55f3da-0347-11e7-b1e9-a05d3c21f7cf_story.html?utm_term=.a4e29e437551</a></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">wapo 3/7/17</div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">A 34-year-old activist admitted in court Tuesday to discussing a plot to disrupt an inaugural ball for Trump supporters with an acid attack inside the National Press Club in downtown Washington.Scott R. Charney, of Northwest Washington, pleaded guilty in D.C. Superior Court to conspiracy to commit assault, a misdemeanor. In an agreement with prosecutors, the criminal record will be expunged if he performs 48 hours of community service.The arrest of Charney hours ahead of the Jan. 19 DeploraBall attracted national attention, with police saying they had successfully foiled a dangerous plan to spread butyric acid through the press club’s ventilation system the night before Trump was inaugurated as president.The crux of the police case was a conversation secretly recorded by associates of conservative activist James O’Keefe, who caught Charney and two others discussing the plot over beer at a pizza restaurant in December. O’Keefe’s operatives took the video to D.C. police and posted portions of it on the Internet.[<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20170309065644/https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/meetings-of-activists-planning-to-disrupt-inauguration-were-infiltrated-by-conservative-media-group/2017/01/24/b22128fe-e19a-11e6-ba11-63c4b4fb5a63_story.html?utm_term=.77f97170bf0c" shape="rect" title="www.washingtonpost.com" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; box-sizing: border-box; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(213, 213, 213); zoom: 1; margin-bottom: 18px; line-height: 1.8em;">Group run by James O’Keefe infiltrates Trump protesters ahead of inauguration</a>]<div style="box-sizing: border-box;">Protest leaders maintained that Charney, who works at a local nonprofit group, and two others at the restaurant never considered carrying out an attack. They said the group knew it had been infiltrated and that the conversation was a ruse to distract from their real plans to identify the operative.Charney’s attorney, Shan Wu, said his client “had not intended to injure anyone in any way.” He said his client did not have any acid and added, “I certainly think the plea offer with no criminal conviction or record correctly reflects the innocuous nature of this offense.” Wu said Charney “apologized to the court, to law enforcement and to any other who might have been alarmed by his statements.”Bill Miller, a spokesman for the U.S. attorney’s office for the District, declined to comment beyond the plea agreement offered in court. Two other associates of Charney’s were also arrested in the same case; both pleaded guilty earlier and were also given 48 hours of community service.Charney’s arrest was among the first by police trying to head off or confront protesters who tried to disrupt the presidential inauguration.The day Trump was sworn in, a small group of protesters rampaged through a four-block area of downtown near Franklin Square, armed with hammers and crowbars, burning a limo and breaking windows of shops and cars. Rocks were thrown at riot-gear-clad police who countered with pepper spray and explosive “sting grenades.” Police arrested more than 230 people on charges of felony rioting. Prosecutors dropped charges against some, and a grand jury indicted 214 as authorities connected them to “black bloc” tactics of premeditated violence.[<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20170309065644/https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/protesters-vowed-to-shut-down-the-city-police-vowed-to-protect-the-inauguration-they-clashed/2017/01/20/0a1b2d1a-df4e-11e6-ad42-f3375f271c9c_story.html?utm_term=.51a5cb98ff0a" shape="rect" title="www.washingtonpost.com" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; box-sizing: border-box; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(213, 213, 213); zoom: 1; margin-bottom: 18px; line-height: 1.8em;">Inauguration protests turn violent</a>]<div style="box-sizing: border-box;">Charney’s plea agreement identifies him as a member of the D.C. Antifascist Coalition/DisruptJ20 Movement, an umbrella organization representing a variety of groups that came to the District to protest Trump.In a statement released after his plea was entered in court, Charney called the charges political and said his arrest was more about “silencing dissent in Trump’s America.”“I have apologized in court and taken responsibility for carelessly speaking in a way that alarmed others,” the statement says. “But the far greater causes for alarm are the real acts of violence being perpetrated against Asian Americans, Hispanic Americans, Muslim Americans, Jewish Americans, and others targeted by Trump’s policies.”O’Keefe said in an interview last month that the discussion his operative captured on video was part of a real plot and that the arrests by police prevented groups from carrying out other even more disruptive attacks, such as chaining Metro cars to cripple the city’s transportation system.On Tuesday, a spokesman for Project Veritas noted that evidence provided by the group was key to the prosecutions but said the group is “absolutely not” satisfied with the sentences.The video shot by O’Keefe’s operative shows a detailed discussion of how to best create havoc at the DeploraBall. Charney and two others settled on butyric acid, which can damage skin and eyes. “This stuff is very efficient, it’s very smelly and lasts a long time,” Charney is heard saying. One of his associates added, “If you get it into the HVAC system, it will get into the whole building.”The plea agreement signed by Charney said the defendants “engaged in a conversation about how they could conceal the acid into the event, suggesting water bottles, water guns, beer bottles, and other receptacles. They talked about how much the acid would cost to purchase and how much it would cost to get into the event. . . . Finally, they discussed dispersing the acid as eventgoers were exiting the National Press Club.”Police also learned that one of the conspirators had purchased tickets to the ball.The plea agreement states that the evidence indicates the defendants “did not want to hurt any person or eventgoer, but rather discussed only plans to disrupt the event.”</div><div></div></div></div>