Prosecutor: Capitol rioter aimed 'to take hostages' - ABC News
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
A prosecutor says a retired Air Force officer who was part of the mob that stormed the U_S_ Capitol carried plastic zip-tie handcuffs because he meant "to take hostages."
By JAKE BLEIBERG Associated Press January 15, 2021, 2:22 AM • 4 min read Share to FacebookShare to TwitterEmail this article
FORT WORTH, Texas -- A retired Air Force officer who was part of the mob that stormed the U.S. Capitol last week carried plastic zip-tie handcuffs because he intended "to take hostages," a prosecutor said in a Texas court on Thursday.
"He means to take hostages. He means to kidnap, restrain, perhaps try, perhaps execute members of the U.S. government," Assistant U.S. Attorney Jay Weimer said of retired Lt. Col. Larry Rendall Brock Jr. without providing specifics.
The prosecutor had argued that Brock should be detained, but Magistrate Judge Jeffrey L. Cureton said he would release Brock to home confinement. Cureton ordered Brock to surrender any firearms and said he could have only limited internet access as conditions of that release.
"I need to put you on a very short rope," Cureton said. "These are strange times for our country and the concerns raised by the government do not fall on deaf ears."
Brock appeared in court in a light green jumpsuit, a mask and with shackles at his hands and feet.
Weimer did not detail a specific plan by Brock but noted "his prior experience and training make him all the more dangerous."
He also read in court social media posts from Brock, including one posted on the day of the Capitol riot that said: "Patriots on the Capitol. Patriots storming. Men with guns need to shoot their way in."
Brock was arrested Sunday in Texas after being photographed on the Senate floor during the deadly riot wearing a helmet and heavy vest and carrying plastic zip-tie handcuffs. The 53-year-old is charged with knowingly entering or remaining in a restricted building or grounds without lawful authority, and violent entry and disorderly conduct on Capitol grounds.
Brock's attorney, Brook Antonio II, noted that Brock has only been charged with misdemeanors. Antonio said there was no direct evidence of Brock breaking doors or windows to get into the Capitol, or doing anything violent once he was inside.
"It's all talk. It's all speculation and conjecture," said Antonio, who noted Brock's long service in the military, including being reactivated after Sept. 11 and his four tours in Afghanistan.
Weimer said Brock will likely face additional charges.
More than 100 people have been arrested in the Capitol riot, with charges ranging from curfew violations to serious federal felonies related to theft and weapons possession.
The FBI has been investigating whether some of the rioters had planned to kidnap members of Congress and hold them hostage.
Before his arrest, Brock told The New Yorker magazine that he found the zip-tie cuffs on the floor and that he had planned to give them to a police officer.
"I wish I had not picked those up," he said.
There was no evidence presented that Brock had a firearm on the day of the Capitol riot.
Antonio asked an FBI agent who was testifying whether it was possible Brock had just picked up the cuffs, and the agent acknowledged that was a possibility.
Weimer read a termination letter from Brock's former employer that said he had talked in the workplace about killing people of a "particular religion and or race." Weimer also read social media posts in which Brock referred to a coming civil war and the election being stolen from President Donald Trump.
Weimer said Brock's posts also referenced the far-right and anti-government Oath Keepers and the Three Percenters, a loose anti-government network that's part of the militia movement. The Oath Keepers claim to count thousands of current and former law enforcement officials and military veterans as members.
The FBI agent though testified there was no evidence beyond the social media posts that Brock was involved with either of those groups.
Judges across the country, including some nominated by Trump, have repeatedly dismissed cases challenging the election results, and Attorney General William Barr has said there was no sign of widespread fraud.
———
Associated Press writer Jamie Stengle contributed to this report from Dallas.
Comments (0) Share to FacebookShare to TwitterEmail this article
Tags
Who is online
447 visitors
Again..... This is what you get when you listen and read propaganda, such as "The election was stolen." rather than looking at facts.
I expect a hell of a lot more in the way of critical thinking skills from those that have taken the oath of enlistment.
We should, but I don't. In reality our military personnel are no more, or less, smart than any other segment of our population.
I know you're right EG, but for me.... left, right matters little when it bumps up against the constitution.
There has been a big rise in Evangelicals in the military at all levels and branches as well as alt+right militia groups in the enlisted ranks. No one accused many of them of being mensa candidates.
Uh, no. It's one response from a number of possible responses. I know a number of people who think the election may have been stolen who do not think violence like this is the answer.
I would hope so, too. However, your first statement shows a lack of critical thinking on your part or, at least, subjugating them to your emotions. Believe it or not, I don't intend that as a dig against you. I simply consider it an obvious conclusion. Surely you recognize that reading and listening to "propaganda" as you put it doesn't inevitably result in this man's behavior. Saying that it does doesn't help in dealing with the situation rationally. It only encourages others to make the same sort of inaccurate statements which, in turn, encourages irrational responses.
Actually, your interpretation of Fly's statement lacks critical thinking on your part.
Fly didn't claim that was the ONLY 'response' yet you implied that he did. The rest of your comment merely bolsters that.
Apparently, what appears on your screen is different than mine. What mine said was....
Perhaps what appears on your screen is different. Perhaps your screen says some variant of...
If so, I can understand your statement. As you can see by what appears on my screen, "This is what you get" doesn't include other possibilities but, rather, claims a specific outcome. Perhaps I've cleared things up for you now?
So you're claiming that you think Fly meant EVERYONE who believes that the election was stolen was at the Capitol on Jan. 6th?
Uh, what? What was it you think I said that leads you to ask this question? Or is this an attempt at a strawman?
Not!
A derail, even a feeble attempt to disguise the fact that's its Meta....still won't have the majority of people falling for it!
So now the question is-- how many people will fall for that ploy?
How many will fall for it by launching a counter-attack (counter-attacking, and accusing you of one thing or another-- hence keeping the Meta derail alive, thereby getting the conversation away from the actual topic...???)
They have identified 20 plus ex-military and LEO's that were part of the insurrection.
This article is pretty chilling and shows how close the US came to having politicians killed including the VP.
... they all deserve the maximum sentences on every count. reactivate all the ex-military, court martial them, dishonorably discharge them, and remove all retirement benefits.
Also, no stim checks should be given to any of them. That money should go towards repairing the damage they caused.
What is the price tag for our confidence in LEOs and our military?
The bad apples do not diminish my respect for either. They are way too many good military and LE personal for me to turn away from them.
I have no intention of turning away from them. I do however hope that every one of them that had any part in the insurrection are weeded out and prosecuted, if necessary by the military.
As for the LEO's, as long as the majority are complicit in the 'blue wall of silence' they have a long way to gain my respect. BTW, my dad was a Police officer so I saw it for myself and know of what I speak.
But, but, but, this guy said that he found those zip ties on the floor and that he was going to turn them in to the nearest authority . . . .
So exactly what was he doing in the well of congress dressed as he was...? Looking for zip ties to help the police out?
Yeah, like Kyle Rittenhouse was there to help the local businesses out
Based on the information given in the article, I'm a bit dubious about releasing this man to house arrest. Looking for officers to hand over the zip ties to doesn't fit the likely mental state for his being there in the first place.
Maybe he was an avid Horticulturist?
And there's an olde saying:
You can lead a whore to culture, but...
Exactly!
New timeline shows just how close rioters got to Pence and his family
A new report detailing how close rioters were to spotting Vice President Mike Pence inside the US Capitol.
And BTW, these pro-Trump terrorists (who the report calls "rioters") were not BLM, Antifa-- or members of your local Democratic Party!
House arrest?
wtf?
I was certain we recognized him from food shopping or Home depot.....
asshole lives too close to us...
He used to live in the next zip code but had moved to Grapevine where we do lot of Shopping.
Name & address & picture are on MyLife.com
This is unusual - someone hacked Larrys profile....
And this part bears repeating:
Summary: If you see anyone wearing a tee shirt that reads, "6MWE" across the shirt. Report the name of that person to the-FBI. The-FBI wants to place all these people-underarrest.
Thank you Captain Obvious.
I thought he had them to use for cable management around their computers... After all, don't all IT techs wear camo and ballistic vests?
So disturbing.
My dad can't get his head wrapped around all of this. He served in 2 wars, and he wonders what kind of serviceman can do this and call themselves a Patriot. Patriots support the Republic. He is beside himself that this is what our country has come to.
If my father (USMC) were still alive, this would have killed him.
As I watched what went down on 6JAN21, the range of emotions from rage to sadness, to shame were constant. I'm right there with your father.
A day that will live in infamy . . . the 'president' leading his gang of domestic terrorists to overtake the government.
And the spineless representatives who can't seem to do the right thing and stand in defense of the constitution.....in violation of their oath.
As far as I'm concerned, those who stood behind this 'president' are complicit in all this in the first place. They claim fear for themselves and their families yet they knew tRump was a snake and they chose to support him every step of the way.
You can't incite violence and then call for peace and unity
They can and should be expelled from Congress.
Therein lies the rub. These so called Patriots redefine the Constitution and our laws to their liking. We see it here all the time.
Ironically, the Oath Keepers pretend to be all about their oath to defend the Constitution and at the same time wholeheartedly support the draft dodger Donald Trump. I'm sure they see no contradiction. The cognitive dissonance is galactic.
In my opinion, this, and other events over the summer, are in large part due to the amount of rhetoric being thrown around concerning nearly every issue, magnified by the media. There is very little critical thinking going on. Instead, narratives crafted and presented with little or no evidence. The public on both sides are being driven like cattle to a large extent.
Oh bullshit.
MILLIONS of people all over the world WATCHED the empirical evidence of George Floyd asphyxiated. The world wide reaction to that had NOTHING to do with rhetoric, nor did it lack critical thinking.
Please take your false equivalencies elsewhere. They are at best, weak sauce.
Um, yeah. George Floyd was purely and simply killed by police. It had absolutely nothing to do with all the drugs in his system at the time. It didn't have anything to do with the fact that the autopsy said he had a potentially fatal amount of fentanyl in his system. What critical thinker would include that and his heart condition in the assessment?
But, hey, don't think I didn't notice you attempted to dismiss my comment by citing one, one case. Do you consider that critical thinking or the rhetoric I spoke of? Rhetoric, I think. You present only one side of the issue of only one specific example and think that somehow you've proved a point. I don't mind, though, because you provide an example of what I was talking about. Thank you for that.
The Coroner's critical thinking DID include those factors and ruled it a homicide by asphyxiation. But of course you KNOW that so I can only conclude that your comment was for 'effect'.
How many examples would you like? There is a LONG list of names. But of course, you KNOW that too. So WTF is your point?
Now you're just posting argle-bargle.
My comment clearly illustrates that I DID consider both.
Which coroner are you referring to? There was more than one. One says asphyxiation, the other heart attack. Taking into account that Floyd had Fentanyl, meth and Covid-19 in his system, a logical argument could validly be made that the police were a contributing factor in his death, not the sole cause of it. Especially since the video doesn't show him having any problem talking. It would seem heart attack would be the more probable cause of death.
Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying the police did nothing wrong. I think they did. Based on the video I saw, there was no reason for that officer to have his knee on Floyd's neck. But, in my opinion, Floyd contributed to his own death through the choices he made as much as the police did through their actions. I think the process of heart attack started before he was even put on the ground by his own request.
I welcome as many as you wish to give.
Really? Where, exactly?
I assume you are referring, therefore, to the numerous accusations of voter fraud, narratives crafted and presented with no evidence?
(Nope-- not even "little" evidence-- there were some 60 or so attempts at lawsuits alleging fraud-- thrown out by judges because they had no evidence-- just crafted cases with no evidence (as the judges pointed out).
No. I am not addressing that issue at all or in any way. I can't imagine how you make this connection.
Just because there were 2 autopsies, doesn't mean there were 2 coroners.
False.
"cardiopulmonary arrest complicating law enforcement subdual, restraint, and neck compression."
Since your posts illustrate you have no intent to debate in good faith, I'm done.
Perhaps because of the implication of the following statement:
Yet you only seem to want to talk about what YOU insist is 'driving' the left.
Why not address what is driving the right and in particular those on the right that attacked the Capitol?
Well, you are entitled to your opinion.
But your "opinion" is wrong.
Or you have a short memory.
Do you actually believe that during the Obama presidency there was any less of an "amount of rhetoric being thrown around concerning nearly every issue."
And that at the time it wasn't "magnified by the media"?
And how about the same happening during the Bush years?
Well that seems pretty obvious!
I was going to explain it, but from experience I've learned that those who only get their news from Fox would probably never be able to see that. So why should I bother?
Well, are you saying that the same coroner put out conflicting reports? Does that make sense to you? In any case, simple research can settle this. From CNN .
(Sigh) Funny you accuse me of not debating in good faith.
It is not false under any circumstances. One report lists asphyxiation as the primary cause of death, the other, heart attack with no mention of asphyxiation. As I recognized in 5.4.4 , police handling was a factor in the heart attack.
So spare me your false indignation.
Do you bother to read the things you are replying to? What was it I said? I'll quote it here for you.
Does not the word "this", referring to the Capital riot, not include the Capital riot in what I was talking about? Why, yes, it does. Since it does, am I not addressing what I think is driving the right as well as the left? Why, yes I am.
You don't seem to want a discussion. You seem to want a fight. So, bye.
No, in fact. What I said above applies just as much to what you refer to here. So, are you saying my opinion is wrong because I didn't include these things? How far back would I have to go to meet this standard of yours? And...
... what's the deal with this? Your question implies that I made some comment about the Obama presidency and how it compares to what's going on now regarding rhetoric. I don't see anywhere where what I said could be taken to mean this. So how did you get there from what I said?
I don't know. Perhaps you should ask someone who watches Fox. Not really much of an evasion effort, though. Just sayin.
What exactly in any of his posts would ever lead you to believe he only watches Fox News?
Only ONE of the MD's that performed an autopsy is THE Coroner. Just STOP.
Yes and your repeating your own comment doesn't address WHAT rhetoric is driving the right who attacked the Capitol.
You were more than willing to post what you believe is a lack of critical thinking when it comes to the George Floyd protests but not a fucking thing about the lack of critical thinking that motivated the Capitol attack.
Nope, see above.
Um, okay. Scored a point. Medical examiner or MD or whatever pleases you, then, if it makes any real difference.
Well, I was speaking of the situation in general in my 5.4 post when you introduced a specific subject. And I wasn't applying critical thinking to the George Floyd protest as much as I was applying it to your own claims about it. Lastly, since I included the Capital attack in my statement, use of the word "rhetoric" implies a lack of critical thinking. To put it more plainly for you, accepting Trump's rhetoric, rather than thinking critically about things, is one of the factors that led to the attack.
Okay, I really don't have time for more of your just looking to get your mad out. Probably should go find someone else to bother because I'm done playing with you.
I find it hilarious that someone who posts soliloquies suddenly insists that the meaning of technical terms is subjective.
Yes, I recognized and pointed out the selective application of critical thinking.
If that is what you sought to imply, the word 'rhetoric' fails to meet your goal. The mere use of 'rhetoric' does NOT imply anything about critical thinking in and of itself. In fact, the purpose of 'rhetoric' may require quite a bit of critical thinking to fulfill it's goal.
I know how some here just HATE to concept that 'words matter' but since they are the tool we use to communicate here, they really do matter. I've been accused of 'parsing words' as if it's a BAD thing. If members fail to analyze the words other members use, HOW are we to understand what they are trying to convey? I for one will continue to analyze members words because IMHO it shows a level of respect.
I served 20 years of my adult life in the service of my country in two wars and I could never in good conscience even think about what those individuals did. I love my country and the Constitution too much!
Yep....
I wonder if Steve Wilkos knows he has a double.
ooops
It doesn't matter to the left. The narrative is already out there.
Most of them refuse to do their own independent research, but to just rely on what their handlers tell them.
Since that is a personal attack on "the left"-- you are either launching a personal attack on many member of NT!
(Either that-- or its not an attack on people here because you feel that there are no NT users who are Left og center politically...?)
A general statement, not a personal attack on anyone.
BTW, how is that different substantially from you claiming that a particular poster only watches Fox News?
Well see what a DC US Attorney NOT inserted by Barr has to say.
Yup.
Like I said, that guy with the plant ties was merely an avid Horticulturist (looking for teeny-weeny tiny rare plant species within cracks in the seating...)
carried plastic zip-tie handcuffs because he meant "to take hostages."
What did he mean by that?
Simple-- many Horticulturists refer to those teeny-weeny plant specimens they collect as "Hostages"!
(Because after they examine them under the Microscope, they will hold them for ransom-- once the ranson arrives they remove the Zip ties and those poor little plants are now free!
Have you seen this-- actual accounts by police officers who were there!!!
'Kill Him With His Own Gun': Officers Recount Terror Of Being Attacked By Pro-Trump Capitol Mob
Some guys started getting a hold of my gun and they were screaming out, 'Kill him with his own gun,'" said Fanone
No direct evidence of kill????
Heck, I just recently seeded an article about that!
Cops lined a Washington, DC street on Sunday to pay tribute to Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick, who was murdered when hordes of supporters of President Trump stormed the US Capitol building last week.
Since this has not gotten a single comment, I think it bears repeating:
No direct evidence of kill????
Heck, I just recently seeded an article about that!
Cops lined a Washington, DC street on Sunday to pay tribute to Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick, who was murdered when hordes of supporters of President Trump stormed the US Capitol building last week.