10 ul 2 3B 14 45 16 v 18 1s 20 24 SELECT COMMITTEE TO INVESTIGATE THE JANUARY 6TH ATTACK ON THE U.S. CAPITOL, U.S, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, WASHINGTON, D.C. DEPOSITION OF: ELMER STEWART RHODES Wednesday, February 2, 2022 Washington, D.C. The deposition in the above matter was held via Zoom, commencing at 10:02 a.m Present: Representatives Luria, Aguilar, Schiff, Lofgren, and Raskin.10 ul 2 3B 14 45 16 v 18 1s 20 24 2 Appearances: For the SELECT COMMITTEE TO INVESTIGATE THE JANUARY 6TH ATTACK ON THE U.S. CAPITOL: [RR £011N assistant ano SCHEDULER HR (vesticative counset MEE, PROFESSIONAL STAFF HE | vesticative counset ‘(Rc 1 investiarive cOunset, MS, cite CLERK HE 5108 counser HR vsticative counser For ELMER STEWART RHODES: JONATHAN MOSELEY PHILLIP LINDER JAMES BRIGHT10 ul 2 3B 14 45 16 v 18 1s 20 24 2 23 24 25 Me are on the record at 10:02 a.m. eastern. Good morning, everyone. This is a deposition of Elmer Stewart Rhodes conducted by the House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol pursuant to House Resolution 503. This will be a staff-led deposition, though members may choose to ask questions. At this time, I'd ask the witness to please state your full name and spell your last name for the record. The Witness. Yes. Elmer Stewart Rhodes, Ill. And my last name is spelled R-h-o-d-e-s. ; Thank you, Mr. Rhodes. My name is I and I'm an investigative counsel with the select committee. With me from the select committee staff are | chief investigative counse|; EEE, senior counsel and senior advisor investigative course! EE professional staf mene investigative counsel; and AA Present. chief clerk. There are currently no members Under House deposition rules, neither committee members nor staff may discuss the substance of the testimony today unless the committee approves release. You and your counsel will have the opportunity to review the transcript. I'll note for the record that Mr. Adam Schiff has joined the meeting. | would also like to note for the record that what has been previously marked as exhibit 1 is the select committee's December Sth, 2021, subpoena for Mr. Elmer Stewart Rhodes in both his individual capacity and in his capacity as president of the organization known as the Oath Keepers. The House deposition rules are included in this exhibit.10 ul 2 3B 14 45 16 v 18 1s 20 24 22 23 24 25 At this time, could counsel please state their name for the record, starting with Mr. Moseley? Mr. Moseley. Jonathan Moseley, senior attorney and in D.C. Mr. Linder. Phillip Linder, criminal attorney for Stewart Rhodes. Mr. Bright. James Lee Bright, criminal defense attorney, also co-counsel to ‘Stewart Rhodes. HR 1h2r's, gentiemen. | will also note for the record that we are in receipt of the recent correspondence from Mr. Moseley dated January 31st, 2022, and February 1st, 2022, in which he notes that while Mr. Rhodes, you will be asserting your Fifth Amendment right regarding some of the topics identified in exhibit 1, there are other questions that fall outside those bounds. It's our primary objective today to focus on the latter. There is an official reporter transcribing the record of this deposition. Please wait until each question is completed before you begin your response, and we'll try to wait until your response is complete before we ask our next question. The stenographer can't record nonverbal responses, such as shaking your head. So it's important that you answer each question with an audible verbal response. Do you understand? The Witness. Yes. ; sd We ask that you provide complete answers based on the best of your recollection. If a question is not clear, please ask for clarification. _If you don't know the answer, please simply say so. You may only refuse to answer a question to preserve a privilege recognized by the select committee. Such privileges include the Fifth Amendment privilege against compulsory self-incrimination.10 ul 2 3B 14 45 16 v 18 1s 20 24 22 23 24 25 If you refuse to answer a question based on a privilege, staff may either proceed with the deposition or seek a ruling from the chairman on the objection. If the chairman. overrules such an objection, you are required to answer the question. J also want to remind you that it's unlawful to deliberately provide false information to Congress. Providing false information could result in criminal penalties for perjury and/or providing false statements, including under 18 U.S.C. Section 1001, which makes it illegal to provide a false statement in a congressional investigation, That being said, to be clear, this is indeed a congressional investigation, not a criminal investigation. This proceeding is separate and distinct from any current criminal proceeding by the United States Department of Justice. Do you understand? The Witness. Yes. Hs: please let us know if you need any breaks. | would simply ask that if you need a break, you answer the question that's pending before we take a break. If you don't understand a question, please simply ask me to repeat or clarify it We aren't trying to trick you here, so if there is a question you don't understand, we're more than happy to clarify it for you. Does that make sense? The Witness. Yes, that's fine. HR inalty, "1 note that, while I'll be leading the conversation, occasionally other staff members or even a member may join the discussion. At this time, because the deposition is under oath, would you please raise your right hand to be sworn? ‘The Reporter. Do you solemnly declare and affirm under the penalty of perjury10 ul 2 3B 14 45 16 v 18 1s 20 24 22 23 24 25 that the testimony you are about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? The Witness. Ido. The Reporter. Thank you FY Thank you, Mr. Rhodes. I'llalso note for the record that Ms. Zoe Lofgren has joined the meeting. Okay. We'll get started. Could we please pull up exhibit 1? Mr, Moseley. Could | make a little bit of an opening statement because of the circumstances and he may not be able to testify to everything? _ | just want ~ | Mr. Moseley, you can make a brief statement. Mr, Moseley. For example, he ~ Mr. Stewart Rhodes is joining us from Cimarron County, Oklahoma, Federal Detention Center. He would, of course, much rather be able to cooperate with the committee without being indicted and facing prosecution if he had his druthers. But this isthe difficult situation we're in He was asked to testify in the underlying criminal prosecution and eagerly agreed tobeawitness. And then I found out that he didn't have a lawyer and was concerned about what to do with this appearance, and we negotiated a delay until today. Again, for the record, I anc staff have been very gentlemanly and professional and always polite. He has been, though, persistent and dogged. So in between that time, actually the original date, January 13th, of course, when | called to find, okay, what are we going to do about this and not wait till the last minute, he was arrested with me on the phone. So we face a great deal of complications that we wish we didn't have, you know, not least of all Stewart Rhodes would rather not be facing those situations.10 ul 2 3B 14 45 16 v 18 1s 20 24 22 23 24 25 In terms of the completeness of his answers, of course, he's not ~ doesn't have access to his records or ability to review them being incarcerated, | heard from local media that there was a helicopter flying over the place where he was staying for a number of hours. So | thought, well, there go our documents. And so many of those are in the hands of the FBI So we're going to try to do our best. But Phil Linder, of course, came on board. | wasn't his criminal defense lawyer, but Phil Linder and James Bright came on from Dallas. And so | am deferring a great deal to their judgment about their handling of the upcoming criminal trial, which we think will be in July. And some of the inability to answer may be temporary until that trial is over. So | just wanted to explain that. We didn't start out with these problems, but we've got them now. So we wish that were otherwise. HE 12 2°% you, oe. Moseley. Okay. Mr, Rhodes, we can get started | | could we please pull up exhibit 1? Thank you. EXAMINATION as Q__ Mr. Rhodes, this is the subpoena issued by the select committee to you on December 9th, 2021. I'll note for the record that the exhibit contains the subpoena itself, a cover letter from the chairman, a document schedule with production instructions, and a copy of the House rules and regulations regarding conducting depositions. Mr. Rhodes, could you please confirm that the subpoena is addressed to you? A Idon't see my name on it. Where isit at? Oh, yeah, yes, | confirm that.10 ul 2 3B 14 45 16 v 18 1s 20 24 22 23 24 25 Q_ Thank you. You understand that itis directed to you both in your individual personal capacity and in your capacity as the president of the Oath Keepers, correct? A {don't see where it says that. Q Could we zoom in and scroll down to the cover letter? A Oh, yeah, on the cover letter. So~ Q Great. And you understand that you're appearing here today pursuant to the subpoena, correct? A Yes. Q Great. Thank you. We can take the exhibit down. Mr, Rhodes, I'd like to start with just some basic questions for the record. Where is your current permanent residence? A InGranbury, Texas, Q — Canyou provide the address? A Isthisa public record? _| don't want to give the address out because people live at that address. Mr. Moseley. Would you allow him to ~ us to provide that to you or at the end of the transcript perhaps? Yes. We can do that. Mr. Moseley. Is it anyone else ~ do you want to do that now and just have it at the end of the transcript, confidentially, or is anyone else listening to this? ERE The transcripts will not be released until the committee approves release, If you want to transmit his address to us separately over email, that's fine Mr. Moseley. Whatever you prefer.10 ul 2 3B 14 45 16 v 18 1s 20 24 2 23 24 25 a Q |s that address your home, Mr. Rhodes? A No, it's not. It's where Q Whats it? A Pardon? Q Whats it? A Whatisit? It'sahouse. Iwas staying there. It's friend’s house. But | am no longer -- I'm no longer living there, obviously. Q Do you currently own or rent any home? A No. Q How long had you lived at that address in Granbury? A It's been a year anda half. Okay. Where did you live prior to that? A Prior to that, I lived in another residence in Granbury. Q Okay. And how long was that for? A I think about 7 months. Q Okay. A From March 2020 till November of 2020 | lived at a prior address in Granbury. But after that, | lived at the first one I told you about. Mr. Moseley. You want me — you want to handle the actual address the same way? The Witness. Pardon? Mr: Moseley. 'm objecting oi Do you want to handle that address the same way?10 ul 2 3B 14 45 16 v 18 1s 20 24 22 23 24 25 10 TR ec. | can follow up with you afterwards. Thanks, Mr. Moseley. a Q_— Mr. Rhodes, can you give us a sense of where you grew up, places you lived prior to moving to Granbury? A Sure. | grew up on the -- my mom's side of the family were migrant Mexican-American farmworkers from California. So | bounced around, going to schools, spending time with my grandparents while my mother was working. And then | lived in Oklahoma City for about 5 years when we were children. And then we moved to Las Vegas. Went to high school in Las Vegas and then college in Las Vegas after | got out of the Army. Q Great. And after you left Las Vegas, is that when you moved to Granbury? ‘A No. That's when | went to Yale Law School. | worked for Congressman Ron Paul on his D.C. staff for a year, and then | attended Yale Law School in 2001, graduated 2004. And then after that, | clerked for the Arizona Supreme Court for a year. And then after that | moved to Montana where | practiced criminal defense. Q Great. Thank you, Mr. Rhodes. | think you answered part of this, but what is your educational background in addition to Yale Law School? A Yes. College, graduated summa cum laude from UNLV. I went ona VA scholarship, | was a disabled veteran. And then after that, like | said, | worked for Congressman Paul, and then | attended Yale Law School and graduated, Q Thank you, Mr. Rhodes. understand you served in the military, Can you tell me about your military service?10 ul 2 3B 14 45 16 v 18 1s 20 24 22 23 24 25 1 A Yes, | served as a paratrooper in the Army in long-range reconnaissance, and | was permanently disabled in a training parachuting accident. | have a fused spine and two steel rods in my back. Q Thankyou, And thank you for your service. What were the years of that service? A 1983 to 1986 Active. And then had my accident. | took a couple of years ‘on medical holds. I'm not really quite sure what year it was, '87, '88, when | was finally released from medical hold and sent to the VA for rating. I'm rated at 50 percent disabled Q Understood. And did you join right out of high school? A Yes. | joined a delayed entry program at age 17. That must have been tough to join right outside of high school? A Family tradition. We all did. Q_ What did it mean to you to serve? A My family has always served in the military, both sides of my family. On both sides, my grandparents, my grandfathers who fought in World War Il, And | have uncles and cousins who fought in World War Il. And then also Korea and Vietnam. So a long tradition of military service on both sides. My father was a marine. | joined the Army. Q Hopefully, that wasn't a source of family tension, A No, we have military -we have Army and Marine Corps in the family. We go way back. Q imagine that's a source of pride for you, right? A Pardon? Oh, yeah, Q__ Limagine that's a source of pride?10 ul 2 3B 14 45 16 v 18 1s 20 24 22 23 24 25 2 A Absolutely. Yes. Q Are you employed? Yes. I'm employed by the Oath Keepers. Okay. How long have you held the role that you have at the Oath Keepers, and what is that role? A founded Oath Keepers in 2009, and I'm the national president. I've been the national president since the founding, and that was so now almost 13 years. Q Do you take a salary for that work? A Yes,on paper. But things have been rough the last year. We've been deplatformed and demonetized in fact. So it's been very difficult to raise funds or to collect even dues. So even today | can't collect online dues because we lost the ability to take online credit cards. Q Well, I'd like to return to that topic ina minute. But prior to founding the Cath Keepers, were you previously employed? A Yes. Q As? A Asanattorney. Actually, for Oath Keepers, | was writing, and | was in Nevada. My mother came down with breast cancer. It was 2007. And | moved back from Montana, back to Las Vegas, to take care of her before she passed away. She died in 2010. So that brief time | wrote appellate briefs for other attorneys. So that was my employment right before Oath Keepers. And then | founded Oath Keepers. Q Thank you. While you were employed by the Oath Keepers, did you hold any other employment during that time? A |worked as a private attorney fora brief time. | actually have sued a few10 ul 2 3B 14 45 16 v 18 1s 20 24 22 23 24 13 police departments for wrongful arrest. One of the clients was one of the producers for AlexJones. We won a settlement. He was arrested in Pittsburgh, along with other journalists, in a big sweep of the park, and he was caught up init. QQ What year was that? A Good question. | can't recall what year it was. It was pretty early on, but | can't recall the exact year. Q That's okay. Are you currently a practicing attorney? A No, I'm not, Q Are you currently barred in any State or jurisdiction? A No. Q Okay. Have you been disbarred? A Yes, from Montana. Q Okay. When did that happen? A 'mnot sure what year that was. That was ~ it's been at least 7 years. It's been awhile. | can't recall exactly what year it was, Q Understood. Do you recall the circumstances? I think Mr, Rhodes might be frozen Mr. Moseley. And if--| think that | might object to anything about that beyond what is maybe publicly stated. So could you maybe rephrase it in terms of what the ~ what any public, you know, public issues were in terms of just any circumstances that he might know? What was the official --10 ul 2 3B 14 45 16 v 18 1s 20 24 22 23 24 25 14 ae Q Mr. Rhodes, I'm sorry. | think we lost you for a little bit there. But | had asked, do you recall the circumstances under which you were disbarred? A Yeah, failure to appear at the Supreme -- | went to one disciplinary hearing at the Supreme Court, but then the complainant came back again. And the second time | failed to appear, and they disbarred me for that. Q_ Understood. Thank you. Have you ever worked for an office of Federal, State, or local government? A I worked for the Arizona Supreme Court as a law clerk for a year, Justice Michael D. Ryan, right after law school. So that was 2004-2005. Q_— Great. And I think you also mentioned that you worked for Congressman Ron Paul? A Yes, sir. That's correct, What did you do for Ron Paul? A Iwas on his legislative staff in Washington, D.C., | was a legislative correspondent. So lowest on the totem pole. Q I've been there, Mr. Rhodes. A And | also worked as a--I'm sorry, | didn't mean to cut you off -| also worked asa volunteer firefighter in Montana. Q Okay. Great. Have you ever held elected or appointed office in government? A No. I wason the platform committee for the GOP national -- or State convention in Nevada back in 2009, So that's about as close as | ever got to holding any kind of an office. Sol was a delegate.10 ul 2 3B 14 45 16 v 18 1s 20 24 22 23 24 25 15, Q Do you have any relatives who currently or previously held office? A Not to my knowledge. Q Okay. In the course of your career, have you ever received grant money or contracts from any office of government? ‘A No. While | was at Yale, though, right after | got out of Yale, | received a research grant. | was planning on writing a paper on the topic of enemy combatant status applied to U.S. citizens. | won an award at Yale for my paper on that topic, and they gave me a grant to continue my studies on that. That was as close as | got to ~I'm not sure that counts as a government grant. Q Well, that sounds like an impressive award. So I'd like to return to the structure and organization of the Oath Keepers. You mentioned that you have been the president since founding, correct? A That's correct. Q_— What are the duties and responsibilities of the president? A You know, as Mr. Moseley had said earlier, this would be a different — different deposition if | hadn't been indicted. But because I've been indicted, on advice of counsel, in preparing for today’s questioning, | respectfully decline to answer pursuant to my rights under the Fifth Amendment, my right to receive due process at trial, which means I cannot answer, even when my answers will be positive for me, at the risk of waiving those rights. | am going to assert my Fifth Amendment privileges on that one. Q understand, Mr. Rhodes. If | could just get clarification on the basis of your objection, because our understanding from corresponding with your counsel was that you wouldn't raise objections to questions regarding basic details about the Oath Keepers. So, for example,10 ul 2 3B 14 45 16 v 18 1s 20 24 22 23 24 25 16 what the president does seems like a basic detail about the organization. A I'mstill going to object unless my counsel lets me know that they advise me to answer, HE Moseley? Mr. Moseley. Well, | think he would -- since | don't know what the answer would be, I don't know that | can say, But | think that he would be in a better position to know what might be included in that answer. So | think, out of an abundance of caution, that would be his --in terms of what we've instructed about the concerns about the trial and how things may be taken. If he understands in what his answers would be that there could be a potential risk, then we would assert that privilege, even though I'm not prepared to argue exactly what the factual details would be at this time, But it could be, you know, who knows how things could be construed in a trial, | think would be our thinking, if Mr. Linder agrees with that, Mr. Linder. Ido agree. | don't know exactly what his answer would be. But he is indicted on a Federal trial along with other Oath Keepers to be tried in July. So! believe he would have Fifth Amendment protection to this question of what his role is potentially as president of that organization. Mr. Moseley. And | may have omitted something | might have stated in the opening, is that the charges involve at least two conspiracies and are fairly abstract. So what he is alleged to involve, you know, would involve things not like direct action so much as, you know, who he may have worked with and various things like, are really kind of in the heart of what the indictment is. So there are a lot of things that in your usual case might not seem to be a problem. Here, they're kind of in the middle of what the conspiracy allegations are.10 ul 2 3B 14 45 16 v 18 1s 20 24 22 23 24 25 7 So think that the ~ and again, Mr. Linder, has the problem with going into court in his criminal defense. I don't. But I think that would be sort of the considerations. It's not like someone who is charged with robbing a jewelry store, and there's the jewels in the passenger seat. It's more about conspiracy and things like that, So that's. the position we take. HR Thank you, mr. Moseley. Let me rephrase it and go back in time. At the time that you founded the Oath Keepers, what were the envisioned duties of the president of the organization? The Witness. I'm till going to -- apologize -- I'm still going to invoke my Fifth Amendment rights and my right to due process. My concern is the free ~ the wide-open accusations against me could sweep in almost anything, So that's like I'm in jeopardy matter no matter what you're asking me to say about that. The Witness. Unless my counsel advises otherwise. HE. vosciey? Mr, Moseley. I'd make the same argument. Again, ifit's - well, I don't know. | mean, there might be a way to rephrase the question to narrow it just to the running of the Oath Keepers, But there is also, | think, alot of cautious, you know, trying to be conservator cautious about these things at this point. And so I'l defer to the discussions | had with his criminal defense attorneys, which really |have to do. And I think ~ so we'lljust take it-- welll just have to take that for now. As | have said, | think the Fifth Amendment rights are a temporary delay until the criminal case is resolved. That would be our position.10 ul 2 3B 14 45 16 v 18 1s 20 24 22 23 24 25 18 RR 4:1 just to be clear on this particular question, you're objecting to the question of what the duties of the president of the Oath Keepers are? Mr. Moseley. Well, I mean, | can imagine that there may be issues with regards purely internally in terms of running an organization, but | can also imagine that there may be broader things than that in terms of networking or working with other people or such things like that that may be used in some form, and I don't know what those answers would be. But that’s where | think | might agree that those things will be quoted or used in some form like that. So I think in any kind of civic organization or political organization there is a lot, more external networking than just like running a typing pool or something like that in a typical business. So I'm guessing that there are things that could be used against him at trial as far as | can tell you. | Okay. Well, Mr. Moseley, you referenced purely internal duties, so maybe we can start there. Mr. Rhodes, what were the internal duties of the Oath Keepers’ president. The Witness. Same objection. | mean, | gave a 3-hour interview to the FBI, | was very forthright back in May, trying to clear things up, and it did me no good. And legal counsel at the time, my criminal defense counsel at the time, Ed McMahon, had told me don't even say a word to the FBI. He was pretty upset with me for even doing that. But | wanted to clear things up and hopefully clear up any misunderstanding about what we were doing there and what we weren't doing there, and it did me absolutely zero good. And this is where | am now. Now | have been indicted. You know, | wish | could be as freewheeling with you,10 ul 2 3B 14 45 16 v 18 1s 20 24 22 23 24 25 19 that would be fantastic, help to clear the air, but | can't because | have been indicted, and I have to take that into -- take that seriously. So | have Fifth Amendment concerns about answering any of these questions, frankly, because they could be used against me HE o:2y.Andto be clear, you're asserting that Fifth Amendment privilege because you have a good faith belief that the answer could damage your ability to defend against pending or potential criminal charges? The Witness. Yes, sir. Also, I'm concerned about being charged with contempt of Congress ~ or, yeah, not contempt of Congress, perjury, if my answer is incomplete because I don't have -- I mean, our bylaws are online. You can find the bylaws. The bylaws state what the office of the president does. You can go look the bylaws up. But I don't have it in front of me. So those are public information, Mr. Moseley. Mr. Linder, do you want ~ I'm really kind of split roles on this. Do you want to help? Mr. Linder. Well, and you guys cut out on me a little bit, so I'l try to address the last things | heard. | believe Mr. Rhodes answering a question about his role as president of the Oath Keepers goes directly at issues we may have at trial. As Mr. Rhodes said, he tried to clear this up in May and gave a 2-hour voluntary interview [audio malfunction]. Mr. Moseley. Oh, no, technical. Mr. Linder. As he mentioned, it did him no good. He still ended up being indicted. And so -- and the nature of the indictment with the conspiracy counts and all, this goes directly at what we're going to have to defend against. So particular questions about Mr. Rhodes' role in Oath Keepers or anything about that, we would assert the Fifth Amendment privilege,10 ul 2 3B 14 45 16 v 18 1s 20 24 2 23 24 25 20 I mean, the background questions you asked are perfectly permissible. And, hey, welll cooperate, As Mr. Moseley said, we would cooperate later, after the criminal proceedings are over. He wanted to cooperate before he was indicted. But at this point, we're in kind of a tough position, so | don't think he can answer those questions. vic. Linder, could you clarify for us whether the scope of your Fifth Amendment assertion spans the entire 13 years of the existence of the Oath Keepers? I think a: ask about the roles and responsibilities at the founding, which was 2009, So could you just explain a little bit more how that-- an answer to that -- would potentially incriminate him for something that happened in 2021? Mr. Linder. Yes). That's a great question. The fact is, Idon't know. Oath Keepers have been indicted, as you know, 17 or 18 of them. We don't know the full scope. We know that the indictment focuses on January 6th, but it also focuses on things leading up to January 6th. And so we don't know how that - how far back the government will try to go with that. So I think anything along those lines at this point would be protected, | | TERI <> you have another question? Okay. Well, I'd like to ask about some of those internal questions, and, hopefully, we can get to a place where we can get answers on those. Are you currently a corporate officer of the Oath Keepers organization? The Witness, | am listed as the president, I'm listed as a board member and the president. HE receorrer- Mr. Moseley. Let me just clarify, if it helps any at all. [Inaudible] people have disputes about who ~ it's not unusual -- about who is or isn't [inaudible]. But to the10 ul 2 3B 14 45 16 v 18 1s 20 24 22 23 24 25 21 extent that this is public information, you know, that it would be listed on the secretary of state's website, or something like that, that would be -- The Witness. That's correct. You can go to the secretary of state and look at his website, and it'll st all of the board members and the officers. ys Q_ Are there board members of the Oath Keepers organization who are not corporate officers? A Pardon? Q_ Are there board members of the Oath Keepers organization who are not corporate officers? A Yes, because the State of Nevada requires only president, secretary, and treasurer. Q Who are those other board members? A Who are what? Q Well, we just established that there are board members who are not, corporate officers. Can you provide their names? A I don't know exactly who is currently on the board because there are some people, | think, who have withdrawn, so I can't give you a complete answer, But you can go on the secretary ~- I can't do it myself, | would do it for you ~~ but you go on the secretary of state's website and look up who is listed as the current board members right now. Q Well, Mr. Rhodes, you just said that the list that’s on the Nevada secretary of state's - and their records would be incomplete because -- A No, I didn't say that. | said I don't know what the current list is. So! would have to go to the secretary of state's website myself to see. So I'm just10 ul 2 3B 14 45 16 v 18 1s 20 24 22 23 24 25 2 recommending that you do that instead of [inaudible] Q_ Are there individuals who recently served on the board whose names you can share with us? A Sure. So one was Greg McWhirter. He was my vice president until this last ~ this summer, 2021. So he was my vice -- he's a cop in Montana. He's a reserve deputy in Montana, But he is he withdrew because he's concerned for his firearms business, concerned about losing his FFL because of the harassment he's been subjected to himself. Q— Great. Thank you. A Ub-huh, Q Anyone else you can provide? A Who were recently board members but no longer are? _ Is that what you're asking me? Or who are still board members? Q_— Any past or current board members who you can remember. A Well, sure. But I'm not sure what the relevance of that is. Mr. Moseley, should | answer this question? Mr. Moseley. Well, again, if it would be public information, | think that you could do that. And understand what he is saying is, is that because of all the controversy, it's not, you know, people resigning, it may not be public information as to whosoever. ‘And, again, may | -- for example, the gentleman where ~ whose house Mr. Rhodes was arrested at was fired almost immediately after having CBS helicopters over his head. So | guess one issue would be to have -- make sure that this is not -- that their privacy is respected to the extent that they may be harassed or something, So maybe Mr. Linder has suggested, but the difference between whether you get that information and whether their privacy is also respected in the environment may be10 ul 2 3B 14 45 16 v 18 1s 20 24 22 23 24 25 23 the answer. | don't know if that's what you ~ again, I'm not talking about private things necessarily, but | think who the board of directors are would probably be public information if it wasn't fluid and changing, \s that ~ can you help me here, Mr. Linder? Mr. Linder. | think we can provide later, | think we can go on the secretary of state's website and get that information and provide it to this committee. | think a little bit of privacy would be great because his friend did lose his job, he's got a family to support, and that could happen here if these names get out. But we will be happy to go on the website, get that information, and provide you with it after the hearing today. The Witness. That is a big concern of mine, He lost a $130,000 job because CNN called his boss and said, you know, why is the FBI outside this man’s house? And he was immediately fired. And Texas is a right to work State, he has no recourse. So there are prior board members who could be doxxed and harassed like McWhirter was. | only mention McWhirter because he was publicly harassed by a reporter who tried to call him and get him fired from the sheriff's job. And the sheriff told him to go pound sand. So | know Greg's okay with me mentioning his name, but other people, you know, they have jobs and careers, and they're being harassed. So | really ~ I do have concerns for their privacy. | Okay. | understand the point that you and your counsel are making regarding the other individuals. Mr. Moseley and Mr. Linder, I'd like to follow up with you after the deposition to ~ Mr. Moseley. Sure.10 ul 2 3B 14 45 16 v 18 1s 20 24 22 23 24 25 24 Mr. Linder. We can do that. TR 20: | wart to be clear that, you know, we have established that there are board members who are not corporate officers on record with the Nevada secretary of state. So to the extent that the names of past board members are available, we'd like those, and | can follow up with you afterwards. Mr. Linder. We can do that. HR Thank you a Mr. Rhodes, do you know Kelly SoRelle? A Yes, do. Q Whois she? A. Sheis the Texas attorney who served as our general counsel for Oath Keepers. Q How long have you known Ms. SoRelle? A Since May of 2020. Q Thankyou. A I believe. If that's correct. Q Ms. SoRelle has represented to the select committee that she is currently acting as president of the Oath Keepers while you're incarcerated. Is that correct? A That's incorrect. She's mistaken. | had initially given her power of attorney so she could pick up our mail and make deposits, but | have since withdrawn that, and | am going to give power of attorney to another individual in Texas who's going to take care of that forme. So she was mistaken when she said that, she misspoke. Q Okay. Are you able to provide the name of the person who is acting as president?10 ul 2 3B 14 45 16 v 18 1s 20 24 22 23 24 25 25, A I'mthe president. My vice president is — our bylaws state that the vice president will act when the president cannot. So|'m still the president of Oath Keepers, but he is my vice president, and he is taking care of the organization while I'm here incapacitated, at least partially incapacitated Q Okay. And can you provide us that name? A Actually, | have the same concern with him because he could lose his job. Mr. Moseley. Can we handle that the same way? Mr. Linder, We'll provide it to you Wan ask a question here just to clarify? You are not making a legal objection to providing the information that we're requesting because that is what Congress would normally defer to, a legal objection for privilege reasons. And you are not asserting a privilege, this is a preference. Is that, accurate? Mr. Linder, Correct. We can provide the names. We will have to do it off the record Mr, Moseley, And it has to do witha third party. So, mean, | understand the relevance to the committee, but it's in the context of ~ like, for example, we have documents, including Steward Rhodes' FBI interview, where we can't release that because of third parties that are mentioned. So that we're asking for that, yes. HR 21, just to clarify, my understanding from your prior correspondence was that you were not ~ that DO) did not give you permission to share that because of a nondisclosure order, but it wasn't about third party privacy. Mr. Moseley. Well, they've told us in the past that if third parties are redacted, it depends on what the document is. But if the basis under the protective order is third party privacy, which it often is, that a redaction is okay. They gave you a more blanket10 ul 2 3B 14 45 16 v 18 1s 20 24 22 23 24 25 26 denial than they have dealt with in the past. So, | mean, these documents aren't like national security, They're mostly about third party confidentiality. And that can be cured, but they didn't seem to be cooperative with you, which surprises me, But that’s where we are, HR | think the questions that we're asking are separate and apart from documents you may have provided to DOJ, the actual items that exist, whether or not there was a prosecution or a 302 with DOJ. We're talking about who is currently the vice president of the Oath Keepers. That's just a fact. And that’s not something you're going to share here? Mr. Moseley. We will share it, and we're asking to do that, like | have seen oftentimes, it will be at end of the transcript in a more confidential section. | mean, | think our agreement with Mr. Linder, as you heard him say, we will provide that, but we're just asking that it not be waved around to needless harm another person. TH 042). anc the person that Mr. Rhodes is going to give power of attorney to, is that the same person as the vice president, oris that someone different? The Witness. We're still ~ actually, one power of attorney will be given to the gentleman who lost his job because they called his ~- because CNN called his work. He will be one of my power of attorneys. The other one is going to be possibly my vice president, So we're still trying to figure that out. HR 242. Andis the power of attorney going to be on behalf of the organization or on behalf of you as an individual? The Witness. | believe it will be this individual, but also the organization as far as myrole asthe president. I'm still--| can still talk to them over the phone, but it's difficult. | can't goto the bank. You know, | can't refile our secretary of state filing for officers. You know, | can't amend our list of corporate officers or work numbers. |10 ul 2 3B 14 45 16 v 18 1s 20 24 22 23 24 25 7 can't do that from jail. So those are the logistical things that they'll be doing for me in my stead. TR ok. Understood. Thank you. Turning it back to you, 1 oe 0 thes Mr. Rhodes, earlier in our conversation, you mentioned that you have taken a salary for your work with the Oath Keepers since the founding. How much has that salary been? A. It's take-home 1,600 per week, I don't --I think it started at 96,000, | think it's 100,000 now. But like | said, that's really on paper because this last year we were so demonetized | really haven't drawn a paycheck. Q Understood, And that number has remained relatively consistent with the ~ A Yes, 96,000, and then it went up to 100.000, and it stayed there. But like | said, I'd have to go back. It turned into 1,600 a week take-home it turned into. Q Okay. A. The exact amount | can't recall Has any real property ever been purchased with Oath Keepers funds? Define real property. Land, Buildings. No. ( ) ‘Are there other assets that have been purchased with Oath Keepers funds? A Sorry, 'm going to have to invoke my Fifth Amendment privilege again and my due process rights privileges on this.10 ul 2 3B 14 45 16 v 18 1s 20 24 22 23 24 25 28 Q Okay. A Unless my counsel advises otherwise, Q Okay. Hearing none. Have you held other roles within the Oath Keepers organization? A No. I mean, | wrote, of course, but that's within my purview of my obligations as president. So, no, no other roles. Q And have you ever represented the Oath Keepers organization as an attorney? A No. Q Okay. Great. Thank you, Mr. Rhodes. I'd like to ask some questions about the history of the organization, starting with the founding, which you mentioned was in spring 2009, correct? A Correct Can you walk me through why you started the organization at the time? ‘A Unless my legal counsel has any other input on that, I'm willing to answer that. | worked for Congressman Paul, who | consider to be the most consistent constitutionalist in Congress. And then | worked on his campaign for President in 2009. Like | said, | worked on the platform committee for the GOP in Nevada. ‘And when he didn't get the nomination, | realized that we were in trouble, We had John McCain, | considered to be a snake and an oath breaker, and | thought we were in serious trouble in this country regardless of who became the President. At the time we didn’t even know whether the Democratic nominee was going to be Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton, But it didn't make a difference to me. Both of them I considered had a bad track record.10 ul 2 3B 14 45 16 v 18 1s 20 24 22 23 24 25 29 So | was very concerned about the seriousness of where our country was and the lack of concern for the Constitution by both parties. And I wrote that paper at Yale Law School sharply criticizing the Bush administration for all of the excesses in the name of the war or terror, the growth of the executive power. The application of the laws of war to American citizens Yasser Hamdi and Jose Padilla | found was shocking and we had crossed the Rubicon. So I really was very concerned about where our country was going and | wanted to do what | could to get the focus back on the Constitution, especially among those of us who have taken the oath who are military, police, fire, EMS, and search and rescue personnel. We saw what happened in Hurricane Katrina. You had gross violations of civil rights. You had police officers executing people because they considered them looters, just shooting them on sight. Some of them were later on indicted, properly indicted for murder. You had people confined to the Super Bowl, to the Super stadium there, and not allowed to leave, were killed inside of it So you had massive gun confiscation in New Orleans in direct violation of the Constitution, which was later ruled unconstitutional, but no one did on the ground because police officers were following unconstitutional orders. So it was a big wake-up call. So | wanted to make sure that we reached out to our current serving brothers, military and law enforcement, and remind them of their oath. We saw stop and frisk in New York City, | thought it was a gross violation of the Fourth Amendment. So all of these things led to me starting the Oath Keepers. And my orientation is. president, very constitutionalist and very libertarian. And most of all, my10 ul 2 3B 14 45 16 v 18 1s 20 24 22 23 24 25 30 McWhirter until last summer, he is also a staunch libertarian, very much opposed to — he is not a Trump supporter at all, very much opposed to any stop and frisk or violation of the Fourth Amendment, as am | So those were the motivations for starting the Oath Keepers, was to outreach to the current serving and remind them of their oath, they need to come and take it seriously, and remind them that the Nuremberg defense doesn't work. Just following orders does not work. It didn't work for the Nazis at Nuremberg, it doesn't work now. Okay? It didn't work for the My Lai Massacre. Lieutenant Calley violated his oath, He tried to defend himself by saying that he was just following orders, but he was properly indicted and put in prison. So we wanted to make sure that people understood the seriousness of their oath, that they're on the hook. And like | told them from the start, you're on the hook either way. If you're in the military, you were taught the laws of wars, if you violate them, you're on the hook, you could end up in Leavenworth. if you follow unlawful orders, you have a duty and obligation to refuse them. If you follow unlawful orders, you can go to prison. If you refuse to follow lawful orders, you can also end up being court-martialed and go to prison, too. You're just on the hook either way. ‘And the same goes for a law enforcement officer, you know. We have seen this in the last couple of years with the televised incidences of police abuse. So I think there is an obligation and duty of police officers to seriously consider what they're being told to do and they have to make a decision on the spot that, "No, I'm not going to do that if it's going to violate someone's rights.” Like the people standing around and watching when the cops [inaudible] -- | forgot10 ul 2 3B 14 45 16 v 18 1s 20 24 22 23 24 25 31 his name -- was on his neck for 15 minutes. They should have intervened. They should have stepped in and pulled them off. That's what they should have done. They didn't do that. They failed. Q_— Thank you, Mr. Rhodes. You know, you very helpfully laid out the motivation and founding ideas of the Oath Keepers. At the time of founding, what did that mean in practice, you know, reminding people of the importance of their oath? How did that manifest? A Well, a lot of my founding members were Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department retired cops. We were, obviously, at least 20 percent -- even today, 20 percent law enforcement officers. So a big part of it was, like | said, Katrina. And in Katrina, you had current serving law enforcement officers who were violating people's rights. You had National Guardsmen who had been federalized, brought to New Orleans also participating and violating people's rights. So it cut across military and law enforcement. So it was our mission, is outreach to the current serving to get them to learn more about the Constitution they swore an oath to defend. And especially for the military, we understand when you're in the military you're taught the laws of war, you're taught [inaudible]. When I came through in the early '80s we were taught, here is the My Lai Massacre, here is an example of egregious violations of rights. You know, a more updated version was the abuse of the Iraqi prisoners. They were taught about that. So we're taught in the laws of war not to do these things, but then when they're used domestically, like happened in Katrina, a lot of these soldiers had never had that10 ul 2 3B 14 45 16 v 18 1s 20 24 22 23 24 25 32 same educat »n about the rights of the American people under the Constitution, like Fourth Amendment rights, Fifth Amendment rights, Second Amendment rights, So we needed to fill that gap and educate them about the Constitution because they're being used domestically. And, of course, with law enforcement they're always being used domestically. So outreach and education. We call it reach, teach, and inspire. Reach out to those who have taken the same oath, teach them more about the constitutionally sworn oath to defend, and then inspire them to do the right thing under pressure, which is hard to do, but it's the right thing to do. That's reallyhelpful. Thanks, Mr. Rhodes. A A good example, if you want a really good example, is when the Ferguson riots started happening, | believe it was 2014, out of the gate we saw a curfew being imposed we thought was unconstitutional. We saw the pepper spraying, journalists and bystanders, peaceful protesters being pepper sprayed en masse, not just the people who were causing trouble. We saw SWAT teams pointing rifles at the protesters, you know, using the optics on their rifles, rather than using binoculars, which is the right thing do. And so we wrote a scathing open letter to the Governor of Missouri saying, "This is where you're doing everything wrong. You're violating people's rights.” And then | had my police officers in my leadership write their recommendations for how to do it right. ‘And Greg McWhirter was part of that, my prior vice president. And he had grown up in inner city Indianapolis. He's a six-foot-eight Black guy who grew up in inner city Indianapolis, coached football, understands, you know, the culture there. And he said, look, the advice -- he had been on fugitive task forces and drug task forces and10 ul 2 3B 14 45 16 v 18 1s 20 24 22 23 24 25 33 anti-riot teams also. So he said the way to do it right is for the police only to put undercover officers in the crowd, look for the people who are actually throwing bricks or actually throwing Molotov cocktails or are about to, and those are the ones you arrest. You go in, snatch them out, and you leave everybody else alone. You don't tear gas the whole crowd, You don't cancel the whole demonstration and you don't impose a curfew that violates the rights of peaceful assembly and protest. So we wrote this scathing letter dressing down not just the Governor, but also the police. And then we said, well, here's how you do it right and here's our advice on how to do it correctly that respects people's rights and still gets the job done. Stops the rioters. Stops the arsonists. Because there were arsonists who were burning buildings down. So you do want to stop that. Youneedto, But you do it in a way that respects people's rights. ‘And we wrote that letter, and | would encourage you to go look that one up. That's a good example of what we do. Q Thanks, Mr. Rhodes. So did the Oath Keepers go as a group to Ferguson at that time? A Yes, we did. Q_ What was the goal? ‘A We--a local Oath Keeper had gone down after the first night of riots and talked to Natalie, | don't know her last name, but she owns Natalie's Cakes and More, a bakery shop, and her windows were smashed in. And she asked us to protect her. This was disturbing to us because this is a Black woman, and here is a riot, you know, a protest for Black Lives Matter, and they told her when she was out there10 ul 2 3B 14 45 16 v 18 1s 20 24 22 23 24 25 34 patching up her window, and | was talking to her, she said some of them just came by here, some of the rioters, and told her, "We're gonna burn this bitch down tonight.” ‘And above her shop -- there's a series of shops. Above them were apartments who live there, families lived there. And so she asked for our protection. We went in that night. Our guys were on the rooftops with rifles and stopped the arsonists. They would come by and flip them off and tell them to move back. They even tried to put incendiary devices on the rooftop. But our guys had buckets of water to try to put them out. And we prevented that building and those apartments from being burned to the ground We were there for -- | think we were there for like 2 weeks, guys were on the rooftop through Thanksgiving. So that was our first big mission like that, was protecting that bakery and all of her neighbors. There was an Asian restaurant next door, a Korean-owned beauty supply store And we established it was absolutely offensive that people were claiming to be standing up for the rights of minorities when you're trying to burn down businesses ‘owned by minorities and then murder people, you know, mixed-race people living above. It was just disgusting. ‘And so we went there and stopped it, peaceably. We never used force. Never had to. In fact, everything we've done, we've never had to discharge a weapon or use force of any kind, We used our presence and our deterrence. And our guys are ~~ most of us are prior military or law enforcement, so they're very skilled at doing that. There is a picture, you can find a picture online, we can provide it to you, of, Natalie. She had a -- there was a Facebook post she did, and she's got a young marine10 ul 2 3B 14 45 16 v 18 35, next to her, a MARSOC veteran, special force, special warfare marine, and she’s hugging him and thanking him. And she says, "Thank you to these wonderful men who protected me and my bakery." So it was really ~ it was really awesome to be able to do that. That was great. Q Thanks, Mr. Rhodes. | can tell that you feel very strongly about this, and | appreciate that account. How would you decide, you know, where to go and what to do in places like Ferguson? It sounds like Natalie reached out to you for help. Is that something that's typical, or would you be somewhere that - A Yes, it's very typical. Another good example is when Hurricane Harvey hit in Texas. There was an owner of a very large warehouse in an industrial area who volunteered the use of his warehouse for disaster relief. Became a hub for disaster relief supplies; trucks coming in and going, delivering supplies, and people coming in and coordinating and picking up things they needed. And he asked us -- it was in a gang-infested area. He had two rival gangs on either side of his warehouse and asked us to come in and secure the warehouse, and we did Mr. Moseley, did you have a question? I'm sorry.10 ul 2 3B 14 45 16 v 18 1s 20 24 22 23 24 25 36 [11:00 a.m.) Mr. Moseley. No, | was thinking about clarifying the time period you were talking about. The Witness. Oh, this was Hurricane Harvey. | believe that was 2017, but I'm not sure. | would have to go back and look. It was our first hurricane relief mission. We've done 14 altogether. But that's an example where we're invited in by the warehouse owner. We always get invited to be inside and agree with the host that we're here and, yes, | want them to do the following, and we ~- same thing, we're out protecting this warehouse. But we also escort doctors and nurses who were afraid to go, and there were some of the barrios in the area that were, like, immigrant -- Mexican immigrants who had been completely ignored by any other first responder agencies. They ignored them. But we went in there and delivered supplies, food, medicine, did wellness checks. A lot of our guys are combat medics. They would go in and do wellness checks. And, of course, we have our built-in security because all of the guys are military or lawenforcement. So we would go places that many disaster relief agencies will not go. Like, Red Cross was afraid to go in some of these barrios. ‘The same thing happened in Puerto Rico, there were barrios we went into, like, 3 weeks after the storm hit that no one had been to. No relief had gone in there at all ‘And when asked why, well, because it's dangerous. It's a gang-infested barrio. I'm, like, okay, we'll go in. We go in there and they have no problems whatsoever. So that's what we do. I'll note for the record that Congressman Pete Aguilar just joined.10 ul 2 3B 14 45 16 v 18 1s 20 24 22 23 24 25 37 Q Mr. Rhodes, you know, you mentioned you were going to Hurricane Harvey, going to Ferguson. How would you decide how to prioritize where to go and ask people to come? A Well, based on need. It's like when Natalie said they threatened to burn her business down and that there were apartments above, it wasn't just about property, but about life too, so we made that a priority. So we went in. We had Hurricane Harvey, requests from the warehouse in Illinois that branched out into all of these escorts we were doing. There were truck gangs happening. Part of them were robbing trucks at gunpoint. So we started doing escorts for trucks. We ended up actually in Mauriceville, down towards the coast. We ended up doing Rattle Bombs with local strip deputies who needed backup, and we even ended up protecting the Louisiana National Guard, who had come into Louisiana, but they were not allowed to be armed at all. They were unarmed. So they were defenseless at night, and we protected them while they slept. Q Gotit. Thank you. And you've mentioned things all around the country, and | understand that there are regional chapters of the Oath Keepers, correct? A There are State chapters. We like to have State chapters with good leadership and then also local by county chapters. Q_— What's the relationship of the national chapter and the regional chapters? A I'llwait and see if my counsel advises me to answer that or not or decline based on my Fifth Amendment grounds. Mr. Moseley. I'm muted. Excuse me. | just wonder as to form before we get to that. If you could be a little more10 ul 2 3B 14 45 16 v 18 1s 20 24 22 23 24 25 38 precise about what you mean by relationship. Mr. Moseley. It's a common word, but exactly what are you getting at? HE sere. rn pappy to clarity, Q__ lunderstand the national chapter collects dues. Are those dues funneled to regional chapters, county chapters? Are you engaged in the events hosted by these regional chapters? Do you communicate on a regular basis with the heads of those organizations? ‘And I'm talking just in general, and we can go back to the Ferguson time if you'd like. A Well, in general, we have bylaws that they're required to adhere to, We prohibit membership to anyone who discriminates on racial grounds, or by religion, or country of origin. So we track with U.S. military requirements on that. And | want to make something very clear. We are not a White supremacist organization. It's absolutely absurd defamation that Bennie Thompson has leveled against us. Maybe out of ignorance, | don't know, but absolutely not. White supremacists hate us. They hate me in particular because | will not associate with them. ‘And we do all we can to thwart their efforts to gain traction on the political right, and they hate our guts. So the bylaws are very clear, and | enforce those very strictly. And when it comes to wrath, it's definitely my way or the highway. Other than that, we give our local chapters wide latitude to, as long as they stay within the law, to work our mission of reach, teach, and inspire the current serving disaster relief, for protection against unlawful violence, like arson. All of those things,10 ul 2 3B 14 45 16 v 18 1s 20 24 22 23 24 25 39 we give them wide-open latitude. They will do my mission to go do that. If see a problem, I'll step in because it is considered leadership by exception in the military. If you know your mission, you'll do the mission. I'm not going to micromanage you. But if | see a problem, I'lstep in. That's been my ethos from the beginning. Q Thank you. Going back to what you were just talking about when you said White supremacists hate you and hate the organization, can you expand on that? A Badge of honor. Sure. At Berkeley ~ one of the first missions we did in the Trump administration was to ~- we were actually in D.C. for Trump's inauguration protecting people against antifa on the street because antifa was trying to destruct the inauguration by attacking people. We were on the ground, ‘And then the very next one was in Berkeley. We were there at the Martin Luther King Park in downtown Berkeley, California, twice, because we had seen on video of a free speech event in March 2017 being attacked by antifa and women being beaten. So not having it, stepped in. But there were White nationalists who were trying to worm their way in, and one of my motivations for going to Berkeley —- and this was interesting because Greg actually, at first, opposed us going there, but then he understood my reasoning and he agreed, because | wanted to steal their thunder because | know, because of history or what happened in Germany, when you've got communists or anti-fascists, communists on one side and you've got actual Nazis and fascists on the other battling in the streets, that's what led to -- or helped lead to what happened in Germany with the Nazi regime. And just as the brown shirts gained street traction by defending people against the communists in the streets. | knew that the White supremacists would try to gain street10 ul 2 3B 14 45 16 v 18 1s 20 24 22 23 24 25 40 traction and credibility on the right by showing up and protecting people. That's what was starting to happen. So we wanted to step in, and we did and stole their thunder, We took over the protection of the two Berkeley events, two in a row; one in March of 2017, one in April of 2017. And we took that over and filled that vacuum. So when the White supremacists showed up, we're, like, nope, don't need you. Take a hike. ‘And they were on the outside of our perimeter waving their stupid Nazi signs and all that crap. We couldn't do anything about that, but they did not come inside of our perimeter and did not take part in any of that. And I liked that result, and that's the result | wanted. And that's we did after that, We were in two missions. One was to stop the violence that antifa was trying to shut down. People were trying to use their rights to peacefully assemble and express themselves. And we did that successfully. And, once again, unlike the Proud Boys, we don't ground the street brawl. We just stand there and use our presence and protect people and escort them. And antifa, to date, has never attacked anyone we were protecting, never even tried because we deter them because they know that our guys are well-trained ~ well, we're experts, ex-law enforcement. So we're effective on that front. But on the other side, stealing the thunder of the White nationalists was also @ major part of my motivation for doing all of these trips across the country, all the way through the Trump administration. And | believe we were successful in that too. We wouldnnot let them in. They couldn't get their moment of fame, They couldn't get the street cred of being protectors. We stole their thunder, and it was fantastic. Q Okay. Thank you.10 ul 2 3B 14 45 16 v 18 1s 20 24 22 23 24 25 a Mr. Moseley. Can | just clarify that your question, the timing was ~ | believe it was the beginning and getting close to the 2020 elections. I think Mr. Linder would object to things that might affect his trial if we get any further forward in time towards -- you know, into the latter half of 2020, but | don't think that was the question or the answer. Mr. Linder. That is correct. As long as we stay away from 2020 and things working their way up towards that time frame. | | Thank you both. And thank you, Mr. Rhodes. Ill also note for the record that Mr. Jamie Raskin has joined the meeting. a: Q Mr. Rhodes, you know, when you talk about White supremacists, are there particular groups that you have in mind? A Well, of course, Richard Spencer is the notorious, you know, poster boy for White supremacy. All the knuckleheads who showed up down there in Charlottesville - we did not go to Charlottesville, because we knew it was going to be a Nazi-fest, and we stayed completely away from that. Even though some news media outlets erroneously reported that people standing there in camouflaged were Oath Keepers, we were not there, and | prevented any of our guys from going, Another one was a group called The American Guard, who claimed to be ex-White nationalists. And Patriot Prayer was holding an event in Portland, and prior to that, we had gone and participated in Patriot Prayer events. And also, we had actually worked with the Proud Boys on prior events. They'd fall under command in Berkeley, for example, But at this Portland rally, | withdrew from the rally when | heard that they were10 ul 2 3B 14 45 16 v 18 1s 20 24 22 23 24 25 42 bringing people from The American Guard, that they were allowing them to come in because | looked at The American Guard leader, and he was a notorious ex-Nazi. He had been, like, an enforcer, accused of murdering people. And he claimed to be an ex-White nationalist, but | watched video that he made for his current American Guard members where he said, Well, you know, we're not White nationalists anymore, but we still have friends in the movement that will only come to our events and you, American Guard, are welcome to go to their events. And | was just, like, this guy is full of crap. He's not an ex-White nationalist. He's still a White nationalist. He's trying to worm his way into the political life, which is what I've seen over the years. h And so we withdrew from that event, and I said I'm not going to associate people that | think are White nationalists. I'm just net going to doit. I did a very public condemnation of it when we were trying to withdraw, which caused a lot of grief between us and Proud Boys, you know, so ~ but | felt it was necessary to be very clear that this is why we are withdrawing. We're not going to associate with known White nationalists, just can't do it. I don't want to do it. | can't stand them Q Going back to the topic of regional and State chapters, did you ever encounter any issues related to what you were just talking about, White nationalists, with regard to membership in the regional chapters? ‘A We have, thankfully, only had a couple of people that we discovered were -- based on the bylaws it's very clear that you're not allowed to be a member if you are someone who discriminates across racial lines, or national origin or religion. We track with U.S. military exactly because we had current-serving military in our organization as well. But some would still worm their way in and lie and say that they're not White10 ul 2 3B 14 45 16 v 18 1s 20 24 22 23 24 25 43 nationalists, and when we found them, we would kick them out. But, thankfully, it's only been a few, and we're pretty good about that. White nationalists hate us. They hate Oath Keepers because they know that we're not on their team and they know that we oppose them and they know that we screw with them all the time we can, so they absolutely hate us. But every now and then again, one will try to worm his way in; but as soon as he's identified, he's gone, bounced down the road. Q_— Thanks, Mr. Rhodes. And just to wrap up the questions on the regional and State chapters, you know, it, sounds like you gave them quite a bit of latitude to do events that they wanted to do or trainings that they wanted to do. Is that correct? A Aslongas it was lawful, per lawful defense of themselves and defense of others, yes, and as long as what they were doing at public events respected the rights like, when we go to a protest, we're protecting people's rights to free speech and assembly. Counter protestors also have a right to free speech and assembly. As long as you understand where the lines are, you're not going to violate anyone's rights, period. You're just there to defend only against unlawful violence. We don't engage in yelling. We touched on you don't ~ you know, you see other groups. I'm not trying to pick on Proud Boys, but, you know, them and other groups will yell back and forth with antifa, and we just don't do that. We're stone-cold silent. That's what all my men do, quiet professionals. They're not supposed to be yelling, not supposed to take part in any kind of fisticuffs. They're only to be there to ~~ no mutual combat, supposed to meet in the street, none of that kind of nonsense, but just there protecting forward and use their presence, and then they deter through their presence That's it.10 ul 2 3B 14 45 16 v 18 1s 20 24 22 23 24 25 44 And we've been very successful. Like | said earlier, in all of the years we've done that, we've never had to use force or had to use force against anybody because we deter that. Q_— Were there particular State chapters whose events you intended to attend? I'm not sure | understand that question. Q Were there particular chapters with whom you had a particularly close relationship, or who were active in putting on events that you attended? A Well, over the years it depends. It depends on which -- because they're all volunteers. Nobody is being paid. It depends on which chapters have, you know, people that are on the ball, and well-organized, and going out there and doing it. So it, just depends on the year. It depends on the year and what's happening, and, of course, it also depends on what's going on. In the place where there were hurricanes, then, of course, it becomes a focused effort. | would fly in and bring the national leadership, and we would use our local volunteers, but also try to get people from around the country. There were people from around the country down in Houston for Hurricane Harvey. There were people from around the country that went with us to Puerto Rico for three weeks too. They were from all over the country. And there were guys from all over the country in Ferguson on the rooftops protecting that Black Hickory owner place. You know, they were there from all over the country. The guy she was hugging, the young marine, was from Nebraska. So, you know, it just depends on where we're needed. That becomes the focus of our effort. Q Sure. So ahead of events like responding to Hurricane Harvey or going to Ferguson, were there trainings that either the national chapter would put on or the regional chapter?10 ul 2 3B 14 45 16 v 18 1s 20 24 22 23 24 25 45 ‘A No. Most of our men, because they're prior -- those that paratrooped in the Army, | have that skill set. Other guys were medics, they've got that skill set. Everyone had an MOS. _Or'if they're prior law enforcement, they have a particular skill set or on a SWAT team or might have been on drug interdiction, of course, they have got a particular skill set. And a lot of guys were firefighters. | was a volunteer firefighter myself for atime, Alot of us are EMS. A lot are search and rescue. They bring the skills they already have to bear in a situation, which is fantastic. So, like, in Puerto Rico, we had ~ | had an ex-Ranger with me. We ended up scouting for business ~- scouting for the U.S. military about where did you do helicopter drops from police reports because, as | said earlier, you had other -- Red Cross. We didn’t see the Red Cross the entire time we were there. Up in the mountains or up in the more serious ~- more dangerous barrios, they were nowhere to be seen. But our guys bring their skill sets, and we've got built-in medics usually. We've got guys that are, you know, prior combat arms. They were security built in. We've got prior law enforcement with gang experience, understand gangs, understand how to deal with that, and we dealt with it just fine. The local gang bangers, once they realized we weren't there only to give peace and quiet down, to hand out food and water and do bed checks, they left us alone. So that's what we bring to bear is the skill sets we already have is our military, law enforcement, EMS, fire, et cetera, experience. Q Understood. So there weren't trainings? A Well, | mean, we ~ local chapters were ~ of course, | encouraged, just like in the military, | encouraged all of our veterans to cross-train. And we've got a guy who does radios, he trains the guy like me who does not do radios, how to use the radio. ‘And then we have brothers that are common engineers, who'll teach about generators or10 ul 2 3B 14 45 16 v 18 1s 20 24 22 23 24 25 46 teach you how to do, you know, emergency lighting. So we cross-train among ourselves, but then also, we encourage them in their neighborhoods and communities to train their neighbors in, like, CERT-type emergency response and self-rescue. Because the reality is this is what FEMA — that's why FEMA created CERT is they realized the first 72 hours of any disaster, you're on your own. You've got to self-rescue, ‘And so we do believe very strongly that Americans need to be trained to self-rescue and CERT. We do believe in establishing neighborhood watches. _Like in North Carolina, with the hurricane relief mission, there were neighborhoods that were being looted. They were flooded. They had looters coming in, like redneck looters coming in by boat, and looting these houses, a bunch of meth heads. So we went in and established neighborhood watch. We stood up our veterans, retired police and military at the perimeters, but then we just took the locals ~ one of them were locals that retired from New York, Some of them were law enforcement, ‘And we helped organize them on their neighborhood watch to protect their own neighborhood against the looters. And then once they were organized, we left. We didn't really have time to train them. We just organized them, here's how we do it; here's how we do patrols; here's how you, you know, do it sanely and safely so you're not violating people's rights once again; and here's what we want you todo. And then they took over once they were ready to take over. Q__ Did the Oath Keepers provide equipment for those missions, or did members provide their own equipment? ‘A Itdepends. Most of the time we ask them to bring their own. We don't have the money to provide everything for everybody. But if a guy comes to a hurricane relief mission without a radio, and we have extra radios, we'll hand them out, absolutely.10 ul 2 3B 14 45 16 v 18 1s 20 24 2 23 24 25 a7 Q__ Did the Oath Keepers ever provide weapons to members? A I'mgoing to decline to answer that on Fifth Amendment grounds and due process grounds because I'm being charged with what I'm being charged with. Q_ Understood. Were there firearms trainings among the trainings that the Oath Keepers provided? A Over the years, yes. We had, like, Greg McWhirter owns a firearms training company in Montana, That's what he does professionally, in addition to his gun shop. ‘And many of our guys are -- | was certified as out-of-state security firearms instructor. | was training all of the security guards in the hotels back then when | was going through college. And | was also State certified concealed carry instructors, Alot of our guys are firearm instructors, as you will learn, and so, of course, they'll give occasionally free classes to our members to make sure that they're safe and effective and lawful in their use of firearms. Te erstood. 'm going to take a pause for a minute and see whether any other staff or members have any questions related to what we were discussing, Ms. Lofgren, | don't at this time. HE thankyou, ms. Lofgren. HV thanks. he a Q — Sowe've talked a lttle bit about the membership makeup, and you have talked about the importance of getting either current or current law enforcement or military members into the Oath Keepers. Do you have a sense of how many members the Oath Keepers have?10 ul 2 3B 14 45 16 v 18 1s 20 24 22 23 24 25 48 A {don't think | talked about the importance of getting them into it. | talked about the importance of our mission to outreach to our brothers about what their responsibilities are and as to serving. Q_— Okay. I'm sorry if | misstated it A Actually, we are. I mean, I don't have to go out there and actually try to find law enforcement and military to join the Oath Keepers. They come to us because we're all brothers. Q Do you have a sense of how many members the Oath Keepers has now? A don't know right now, | can tell you at our peak | believe we had 40,000. Q And were those dues-paying members or people who just applied? A Yes, dues-paying members. Q Okay, ‘A That was years ago though, quite a few years back. Q Gotit ‘And do you have a sense of what the last year has done to the membership numbers? A Um, I mean, normally it would have spiked. This is the problem with Americans. They're so polarized that whenever a Republican is in office, everyone on the left goes and joins the ACLU and other groups because, you know, the country is turning into a dictatorship. And then the right feels about the same way about any Democrat who isin office. So, of course, when Obama was in office, you know, we had a large spike in membership of people on the political right. We had some people from the left, though. There were some civil Libertarians and liberal Libertarians. But it just tends to be that way. So when you've got a conservative in office, your membership goes down for a10 ul 2 3B 14 45 16 v 18 1s 20 24 22 23 24 25 49 conservative group. It goes up if you're a liberal group, and vice versa. So when Trump was elected, our numbers went back down because a lot of people on the political right thought that, Oh, we won, everything is good now. We don't have to worry about anything now. So the membership goes down. Then the natural course of events for it to go back up is with a Democrat is in office because more people on the political right would have been concerned and join the Oath Keepers. But because of deplatforming and the demonetization, our bank accounts were canceled without notice. We were canceled off of Stripe. We were canceled off of Mailchimp. Spring Tee won't make T-shirts for us anymore, all because of what they saw on January 6th of some Oath Keepers going into the building. So they just started deplatforming us, so it hit us pretty hard. Q Do you have a sense of generally where the members are located? A Allover the country. Q__ And you were just talking about how, during times when there is a Republican in office, membership might go down. Do you see the Oath Keepers as a political organization? A Ise us-~- like | said earlier about myself, I'm a constitutionalist, and if you had to stick a label on me, would be Libertarian. So I'ma Ron Paul Republican. I've always been in the Republican Party or Libertarian Party, but I'm definitely a Ron Paul Republican, very much a constitutionalist. And | think our membership is pretty much the same. They're very similar, very much Constitution-oriented, not party-oriented. ‘And we have had some Democrats in Oath Keepers, you know, because they stand on the common ground of the Constitution. So | wouldn't consider it a political organization, although we do speak out. This is why, you know, from the outset, we speak out in opposition to legislation we think10 ul 2 3B 14 45 16 v 18 1s 20 24 22 23 24 25 50 violates the Constitution, and we speak in favor of legislation that we think respects it and protects rights. Like the prison reform that Trump signed into law, | think that was a very good thing. But, of course, then you talk about red flag laws and, you know, take the guns first and worry about due process later, we find that very offensive, and we oppose it adamantly. That's a due-process situation there, Q_ Are there other examples of legislation that you supported or have spoken against? A Definitely spoken against the NDAA of 2012 where John McCain had inserted his detention provisions for U.S. citizens. That was horribly destructive. That codified what Bush had done, the executive action that Bush had done, but codified by Congress into law that allowed the President on his own say-so to detain any American on his -- based on his own judgment and declare them an unlawful combatant. It was incredibly destructive of our constitutional system, very dangerous. So | absolutely opposed that, and so did the membership as well Q So going back to the membership of the organization, is there a percentage that you would say are military or former military? A The majority are military. The next largest group is law enforcement. We definitely have a large number of law enforcement officers than any other group like us in the country. Q —Canyou give usa ballpark of percentages? A I would have to guess. This is just a guess, because we never really laid this out on spreadsheets or anything. I would have to guess, probably about 20 percent law enforcement, and then about 70 percent military, and the rest are firefighters, EMS, search and rescue. And then we also allow citizens to come in. We call them associate members, even if they're not in prior service. And to become a full member, |10 ul 2 3B 14 45 16 v 18 1s 20 24 22 23 24 25 51 encourage them to join the local officers, fire department, local law enforcement, or EMS, do something in the community to become an actual first responder. Q What are the differences in what a full member can do versus an associate member? A It'snot really that big a deal. It's just basically atitle. So we treat them all the same. If they want to volunteer for a mission, we put them to work within a skill set they have. So if they're an IT guy, we'll put them in work with IT. If they're clerical, we do that. But we don't like in Ferguson, we're not putting anybody on rooftops that's not prior military or law enforcement, you know. That goes for any other high-profile event like that. We're very careful about that. Q For the law enforcement and military, do you have a sense, a ballpark sense of who is Active Duty or currently employed versus retired or veterans? A Mostly veterans are retired. We do have some current serving. We have some current serving. Like, for example, in November in D.C., we had current-serving Texas constable John Shirley, who's from Hood County, Texas. He was with us in D.C. That's an example of a current-serving law enforcement officer. And over the years we've done that with other law enforcement officers, sometimes current serving or Reserve. I'm sorry. | should apologize to my legal counsel if we're getting into D.C. at all. My apologies. Mr. Moseley. Yeah, | think at the trial -- it would be difficult for trial to get into that time period. The Witness. Yeah. You can see my inclination is to talk freely. | really wish | could. a10 ul 2 3B 14 45 16 v 18 1s 20 24 22 23 24 25 52 Q__ lappreciate that, Mr. Rhodes. A But with the implications of this indictment, you know, I can't be with you like | was with the two FBI agents on the sidewalk in Lubbock. | was very forthcoming. | just can't do that now. I'm sorry. Q Sure, |understand. And we appreciate the information that you have shared with us so far. Maybe | can back up a little bit. And you have mentioned a couple of times the demonetization and the deplatforming of the organization. Did the Oath Keepers have a master bank account? A Iwill wait on legal counsel. I'm not sure if| should answer that or not. Mr. Moseley. Maybe just as to form. Can you describe what master bank account means? PE. 1¢ the organization have a bank account into which, for example, dues were deposited or donations were deposited and expenses were paid? Mr. Linder. And I've got a tough time with the definition of expenses there. | mean, | think this is a much more loosely run organization than you might think. It's got no corporate building, no corporate headquarters. It's a loose affiliation with members! So there's some definition problems there. | would object at this point. HE et metry to rephrase it. a Has the Oath Keepers historically had a bank account? The Witness. Does my attorney advise me to answer that? Mr. Moseley. | think you can answer that historically. The Witness. Yes. Yes, we did. —_—10 ul 2 3B 14 45 16 v 18 1s 20 24 22 23 24 25 53 Q Where? A Like | said, that was cancelled abruptly just 2 months ago, Where? Should | answer that question, gentlemen? Mr. Linder. Historically, yes. ‘The Witness. Yes, with Bank of America. I've banked with them for many years ago from when they were Valley Bank in Nevada. So when Bank of America bought Valley Bank, | banked there personally. So when we did Oath Keepers, | went to Bank of ‘America. Q Understood, Did the Oath Keepers have an account with Prosperity Bank? A I'mwaiting on legal counsel. Mr. Moseley. | think that's okay. The Witness. Yes. After Bank of America abruptly terminated our accounts, | opened an account with a local Texas bank. Oh, actually, no, not Prosperity. That's my personal account. I'm sorry. That's my personal account in Texas after the Bank of ‘America terminated not just the Oath Keepers account, but also my personal account, too, Q__ Did you open another Oath Keepers account after the Bank of America account was closed? A Yes. Q Was that also at Prosperity Bank? A No, it wasn't. Q Where wasit? Mr. Linder, I'm going to object at this point unless we get some kind of time frame. It's getting up near the 2020 time frame, and things that may be included in that10 ul 2 3B 14 45 16 v 18 1s 20 24 22 23 24 25 54 investigation. | would advise him not to answer. — Q Well, then | would ask, when was the Bank of America account closed, to establish the time frame? A Like | said, that was closed a few months ago. It happened in 2021. Q Okay. Understood, A Inthe summertime. I think it was summertime. I'm not quite sure though. It's been a few months. Mr. Moseley. Okay. So if| understand that, the new bank now would be substantially after the events of interest here. So | would suggest that it may not be relevant to what was happening leading up to or during the 2020 election or January 6th. Mr. Linder. Mr. Moseley, | would disagree. At this point, I respectfully disagree. Based on the hearings we've had so far, the government is making - or DOJ is making allegations that go from early 2020 all the way up until January of 2021, calling him a danger. So | think anything in this time frame is objectionable at this point. HB i. tinct, it sounds ike we're talking about considerably after that time period if the Bank of America account was closed just a few months ago. Mr. Linder, No, the - excuse ne ‘At our hearing that we had a couple of weeks ago, DOJ came in and claimed even up until January of this year, 2022 mean, events all the way through 2021, they're claiming Mr. Rhodes was still a danger and a flight risk. So that's going to get into some of the stuff that we're going to deal with at our next detention hearing and at our trial. So anything from early 2020, all the way up to current, | would advise him not to answer. Tokay. Just so understand the basis of the objection, Mr. Linder ~10 ul 2 3B 14 45 16 v 18 1s 20 24 22 23 24 25 55. Mr. Bright. On behalf of Mr. Rhodes, | would like to extend that to any generalized banking questions and the banking nature of from the time of the election through the beginning of this year. It's been alleged through the indictment by the DOJ, as well as included in their formal statement in support of detention, regarding the movement of monies and the expenditure of monies on items that were purchased on the way to D.C,, as well as on the way back. They've included that as part of the allegations of future danger. And, so, | think we would ask Mr. Rhodes to object on his Fifth Amendment grounds based on anything related to that entire time period. Mr. Linder. Correct. thank you, mr. Bright. Mr. Rhodes, are you raising that objection? A Yes, sir, lam. Q Okay. Let me back up then. We were talking about different levels of membership, and | saw on the Oath Keepers website that there were different types of membership that you could sign up for that had different costs associated with it. You could be a lifetime member, for example. Do you have a sense of the breakdown roughly of that, of those different types of numbers? A Ireallydon't, I don't have that, Q —Doyou have a sense of how much the Oath Keepers were bringing in on an annual basis from dues? ‘A Once again, I'm going to decline to answer that on Fifth Amendment10 ul 2 3B 14 45 16 v 18 1s 20 24 22 23 24 25 56 grounds. Q Let me rephrase that. Historically, do you have an average number in terms of the streams of income into the Oath Keepers? A Ireallydon't. I can't -- there's no way I could possibly answer that where I'm at right now, just no way. Mr. Moseley. | think -- if | understand it, | think part of his objection is his ability to access information in incarcers n. And, again, normally, as | said in my opening statement, witnesses ought to review their information before they come in, and | note that he couldn't do that under these circumstances. | think that may be part of the response. The Witness. That's correct, but also Fifth Amendment due process concerns: too. Q Sure, | understand. And just to be clear, you know, to the best of your recollection, 'm looking for a ballpark number. Is that something that you're able to provide? A Aballpark number of what? Annually? Is that what you're trying to ask me? Q Annual amount of money that the Oath Keepers would get from dues. Mr. Bright. Again, | would instruct Mr. Rhodes to object based on Fifth Amendment grounds if it's anything that is post-election of 2020 due to the allegations being made by the Department of Justice. ys Q__I'masking historically.