https://www.newsweek.com/oath-keeper-joshua-james-set-enter-plea-agreement-jan-6-involvement-1684231
There are ten others indicted on similar charges. This guilty plea is expected to lead to Mr. James’s full cooperation and testimony. But even with this deal for leniency he is looking at least six years and maybe more. It could have been much worse. The plea agreement states: “The parties agree that the most analogous offense to seditious conspiracy is ‘Treason.'”
Tidewater News and Opinion Forum 
Plea deals are not proof of anything .
Defendents who don’t think they will get a fair trial often take them rather than roll the dice, and facing a DC jury of 100% Democrats, it might well be a better idea to take 6 years even if innocent than risk 20 in a kangaroo court.
LikeLike
So, the defendant lied to the judge?
Because he was afraid to face “a DC jury of 100% Democrats?”
“Kangaroo court?”
Is that 100% Democrats he is supposed to be afraid to face or is it “urban people?”
Your unwillingness to deal with the obvious truth is pathological. The insurrection occurred. We all saw it. You have claimed that some people Trump is not responsible for planned for violence. One of them admits in court to having done that but you are not buying it – he is lying because our courts are kangaroo courts. Have I got that right?
LikeLiked by 3 people
I did not say he was innocent. I don’t know and neither do you.
But a plea bargain in these circumstances is not proof of guilt. Do you claim that everyone who ever took a plea bargain is guilty?
LikeLike
“I did not say he was innocent. I don’t know and neither do you”
Bullshit. He swore under oath that he is guilty. He answered under oath that he was prepared to kill.
The people who take plea bargains do so because they know that the evidence will lead them to a worse outcome if they go to trial. The idea that an “innocent” man would spend six years in jail rather than plead not guilty is a non-starter.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Everyone who takes a plea bargain swears under oath that they are guilty and not being coerced.
The Innocence Project exists to correct those who actually are coerced.
When facing a partisan jury in a political prosecution and facing 20 years, taking a deal for six leaves you with a life at the end.
LikeLike
“When facing a partisan jury in a political prosecution and facing 20 years…”
How is it a “political prosecution”? He is on video attacking police and he admits to planning parts of the operation.
It seems that you are swept up by the crowd looking for martyrs in what is a pretty cut and dried case of an attempted autogolpe and he was part of it.
He should be fortunate that G. Washington was not president or the sentence would by death by hanging. Then a commutation showing his benevolence. Admittedly, the commutation might not occur in this case. Six years or so at Club Fed is very little for the crimes.
LikeLiked by 3 people
You aren’t paying attention.
I have not said whether the guy is guilty or not, I am saying a plea bargain in these circumstances is not proof of guilt.
LikeLike
…” I am saying a plea bargain in these circumstances is not proof of guilt.”
You really seem to know very little about criminal prosecutions. If an individual is truly innocent he or she will go to trial, knowing that the evidence will exonerate him or her. A plea deal does 2 things. Proves the guilt of the party in question due to the preponderance of evidence (and as advised by his attorney) and, if part of a larger crime or conspiracy to commit a crime, provides testimony and further evidence against others charged within the same crime and/or conspiracy.
He has admitted his guilt and in getting a better sentence deal, has agreed to testify and produce further evidence against others.
LikeLiked by 2 people
No it doesn’t.
A Trump supporter in DC stands no more chance of a fair trial than a Black man tried by a jury of Klansmen,
In both cases, an innocent man might do better to take a plea than roll the dice.
LikeLike
“A Trump supporter in DC stands no more chance of a fair trial than a Black man tried by a jury of Klansmen,”
Do you really believe that a jury could not be seated that is impartial just because it in Washington D.C.? You seem to have very little faith in the professionalism of judges, regardless of where they serve. Sounds VERY similar to Trump’s attacks on a Mexican- American judge several years ago.
LikeLike
Well, considering the rhetoric in this forum and the MSM, no, I don’t believe a fair trial for a Trump supporter is possible in DC.
Those trials should get a change of venue en mass.
LikeLike
That is not for you to decide. That is the job of the judge. By repeating the same BS over and over, you indicate a lack of trust in the judge’s ability to ensure a fair trial.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“ Those trials should get a change of venue en mass.”
Where?
The crimes were on Federal land, in a Federal building against the Federal government and injuring 140+ Federal police
LikeLike
West Virginia
LikeLike
How about Virginia. That’s pretty conservative now. Chesapeake? Even more so.
Actually, DC has enough of a jury pool to cover all bases…and by the time a good lawyer is done with strikes, there should be a good balance.
LikeLike
Have you ever sat through a criminal trial? I did, I watched and reported on the Ryan Frederick trial and watched an innocent man go to prison for 8.5 years because the jury was sympathetic to a policeman who died on the job.
Had justice truly been done, the dead policeman was the guilty party, but no amount of proof of the wrongdoing of the police could deny a Chesapeake jury its revenge for the death of a policeman.
LikeLike
Yes, I have. I have also been privy to plea agreements.
I agree that Frederick should not have been found guilty. But that can be put down to an overzealous prosecutor using a dead cop as the reason, while disregarding the no-knock warrant, or poor defense. However, Mr. Frederick DID shoot the polic officer. Whether he should have been found guilty for merely protecting his home is a miscarriage of justice.
I guess Stand Your Ground only works on the street, but not in your own home.
LikeLike
So, the Oathkeeper was lying under oath when he plead guilty and answered the judge’s questions? You say that you do not know whether he is guilty or innocent even when HE swears that he is guilty of the charge as filed? Gee, he may be an innocent tourist caught in a “kangaroo court” and facing the hateful wrath of “corrupt” black people who might be on the jury. So, he did the only rational thing and plead guilty to serious crimes he did not commit?
Here we have yet another example of just how immune to compelling evidence you must be if you are a Trump supporter.
LikeLiked by 2 people
“You aren’t paying attention.”
You are spewing rubbish. A guilty plea is all the proof anyone needs that the charge is true.
There is no reasonable doubt that his fellow did what he swore he did under oath.
As always you think things that you can dream up count. They don’t. If the evidence arrayed against him was not compelling, it would be irrational to accept 6 years in prison for something he did not do.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“A Trump supporter in DC stands no more chance of a fair trial than a Black man tried by a jury of Klansmen”
Your comparing ordinary citizens of Washington DC to racist Klansmen is ignorant and insulting bullshit.
Most people on juries try very hard to be fair. And, contrary to your obvious opinion, that includes black people. But, if the defendant is convinced that a jury will not treat him fairly, the DC courts allow him to waive a jury trial and let the judge decide. Or are DC judges “corrupt” and/or biased too?
For any newcomers here, Dr. Tabor’s opinions come from someone who thinks the black police officer defending the Capitol and forced into shooting Ashli Babbitt should be tried for murder. That is how he thinks. This “thought” comes from the same deep vein.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“. . . considering the rhetoric in this forum”
What has the rhetoric in this forum got to do with whether DC jurors can be fair to criminal defendants? Where would that fair venue be?
LikeLike
You are missing one key element to your point. COOPERATION. The defendant got the deal BECAUSE he was willing to cooperate with prosecutors to bring the rest of his conspirators to justice.
Casting aspersions on a “jury of ones’ peers”? Another anti- Constitutional rant with little basis.
LikeLiked by 2 people
“Seditious conspiracy” sounds bad, but compared to actual sedition, it is just a thought crime. I note that while the Oath Keepers allegedly stockpiled firearms prior to the protest, they didn’t bring any firearms to the demonstration.
Except for the injustice of ruining Joshua James’s life, this story is just a tempest in a teapot.
LikeLiked by 1 person
By federal statute, Conspiracy adds 10 years to the sentence.
LikeLike
“Except for the injustice of ruining Joshua James’s life”…
It’s called “accountability”. And Mr. James should understand that as a veteran. He made a choice and that choice is what is ruining his life. The fact that he got caught and charged has nothing to do with the law being upheld.
Many incarcerated have said they wouldn’t be in prison if they hadn’t gotten caught. Notice they are’nt saying they didn’t do anything wrong; just that they got caught.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Seditious conspiracy is not just “a thought crime.” That is absurd. The evidence required for this charge goes WAY beyond what people thought. Or even what they talked about. To be charged they had to take actions in support of the sedition. And they did.
Being punished under the law for proven crimes is not usually thought of as “injustice.”
A man is manhandled and choked to death for selling individual cigarettes on the streets and you people say – “Well, he should not have broken the law.” This man conspires with others and commits violence against the Congress of the United States, and you say catching and punishing him is “injustice.: What is the difference in your mind? Never mind. It is a rhetorical question. The answer is self-evident.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Joshua James is a vetran and a Purple Heart recipient. By all accounts, his actual crimes on Jan 6 amount to thuggery, trespassing and disruption. It is an injustice to ruin his life with trumped up charges.
LikeLike
“By all accounts…”
What accounts?
He was part of a mob that was trying to disrupt the business of Congress and prevent them from exercising their lawful, Constitutional duties. Among all the violence, of course.
That is a smear on his record and deservedly so. He swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution at one time in his life. He decided to take the law into his own hands and worked to overturn the election.
It doesn’t matter if he were a veteran, Purple Heart recipient, or not.
He ruined his own life and must take responsibility for it.
You want a martyr. Well, he ain’t he one.
IMO
LikeLiked by 2 people
RE: “He was part of a mob that was trying to disrupt the business of Congress and prevent them from exercising their lawful, Constitutional duties. Among all the violence, of course.”
Sort of like Antifa and BLM were parts of mobs trying to burn down cities?
LikeLike
No, sort of like the folks that chanted “hang Mike Pence”.
LikeLiked by 2 people
More like the right wing infiltrators that started much of the violence to give social justice protesters a bad name.
And ANTIFA ain’t a thing.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“Joshua James is a vetran”
Then he should have known better than to commit “seditious conspiracy.”
Most of his crimes on January 6th are not being prosecuted. The seditious conspiracy to which he plead GUILTY happened before January 6th.
LikeLiked by 2 people
What actual sedition did he commit prior to Jan. 6?
LikeLike
“What actual sedition did he commit prior to Jan. 6?”
He CONSPIRED to commit sedition. Duh!
LikeLiked by 1 person