as a geopolitical showdown. cnn's don is in qatar. what were some of the highlights of the u.s. win? >> reporter: jake, well, there weren't many highlights, it was a pretty tense affair, but the main thing is that christian scored the winning goal, and that's taken the united states through to their first knockout game since 2019. you've referenced the buildup to this game, how tense it was, it was interesting watching the iranian players, again, during the anthem. they appeared to mouth the national anthem. remember, in their first game they didn't even sing it. and of course, pulisic is the biggest star in the american team. they were dominating possession in the first half, struggling to find a way through. but he really put his body on the line to get the ball over the line for the americans. it was a wonderful goal. playing the ball in with a header.

pulisic getting it into the back of the net. he was hurt as a result of that. he didn't come back after the second half. we don't know what his condition is, but clearly american fans will be worried about their star man. >> yeah, of course. what is next for the u.s. soccer team? >> reporter: so they're into the knockout round, as i say. the netherlands is the team they will play next. the netherlands winning group a, team usa finishing second in group b. so that is potentially a tough, tough game for them. but this american team has shown that they are resilient. they're one of the younger sides in the competition. the fact that they've been able to come through this game with all of the speculation and all the kind of adversity that's been thrown at them and the political angles that have been discussed. they managed to stick to the task and get this done. this team is very hard to score against. they've only conceded one goal in the tournament. that stands them in very good

stead. the problem is they don't score many goals either. they know what they're doing so far, that's going to be a great game saturday. >> don, thank you so much. appreciate it. joining us now to discuss, linltdsy, a former member of the u.s. women's soccer team which played in the 2007 world cup. she's a two-time olympic gold medallist. thanks for joining us. the iranian players played under intense pressure today. this came after the players refused to sing the national anthem at the match against england last week. do you think this could have played a role in the team's performance today? >> i think at this level it's important to -- you hear a lot of the things going on behind the scenes, but you also have a job to do when you step out on that pitch. and i thought today both teams did an excellent job of playing a very, very good match, bringing it all, but also in a respectful manner. i also think it's important to note that the world cup can be

an example of how sport can unite countries and cultures but also be a catalyst for change. and so by seeing these things and by speaking about it, hopefully it can be a catalyst for change. >> yeah, i mean politics has been all over this world cup, and not just the iranians. american team captain tyler adams faced a grilling from an iranian, quote,unquote, journalist about his pronunciation of iran and about racial discrimination in the u.s. he was barely asked about soccer. have you ever seen such a politically charged soccer match before? >> well, yes, i have. but i also think it's important to understand that human rights has been at the forefront of this world cup from the get go. so understanding that players have a platform, especially at the world cup, it's a massive stage, for their voices to be heard and for them to be able to hopefully bring about change if needed. so again, i respect all of the things going on off the field,

but i also was excited to be able to watch a match today of that caliber and two teams that were truly fighting to stay in the tournament. >> and obviously the u.s. women's team that you were a member of has faced intense national and political pressure both on and off the soccer field, including the fight for equal pay, investigations into abuse by coaching staff. is this the kind of attention both men and women soccer players should be prepared to endure when one agrees to play for the country's national soccer team? >> i don't think you're prepared to endure these things. unfortunately, i think these things have come about. but if you look at the fight for equal pay for women, i mean, that started way back when. that started from people who paved the way before me back in 1999 and that era. so again, it takes time for things to change. and you have to stay the course. and you have to invest. and again, you have to be united to serve as that catalyst for

change, it's an incredible honor, but it also comes with that responsibility to keep the ball rolling until you see that change, regardless of what the situation is. >> all right, lindsay, thank you. i'd like to bring in an iranian activist and journalist. how do you feel watching the u.s. beat iran? >> i think, jake, this is the first time you see smile on my face as well, no? this is actually that iranian people feel. you boent believe me in the city, the hometown of maw maw is a mahsa amina. from that city people were celebrating from the moment that the u.s. football team got a goal against the islamic national football team. at the same time, the people are

getting killed in the streets. teenagers are getting killed. and they believe that iranian regime using sport to normalize its murderers, its killing, and torturing. cnn actually broke a story that women are being raped in iranian prison. you know, i was actually listening to lindsay, the female athlete, the u.s. athletes, i just wanted to ask a simple question -- if it was not the women of iran, if it was the women of united states of america being kicked out from stadiums just because of being women, simply because of being women, what would have been her reaction? what would have been the reaction of fifa? >> right. >> honestly, now we don't see that this football team representing us, half of the population, iranian women, are not even allowed to go to a stadium. to that is why i'm calling on the rest of the world to be the voice of iranian people and see that how iranian people are celebrating the u.s. victory. >> that's interesting that you don't see the team as symbolic

of the iranian people because, obviously, last week after the iranian players refused to sing the national anthem, iran's supreme leader threatened to torture or imprison their player's family. they sang it today. is that normal behavior for the ayatollah to threaten families if people don't show the kind of nationalism he wants? >> jake, the islamic republic does everything to put pressure on people to remain silent. you see that many teenagers, many schoolgirls, their family members are forced to go on tv to denounce their children who got killed in iran protests. of course they put pressure on athletes as well, but they can choose -- like now many well known athletes like ali lives in iran, one of the best football players in the history of iran is now standing with the people of iran. another, he got arrested.

he is the voice of iranian people. so for that i have to say that we have to credit to iranian people clearly saying that the islamic republic cannot use a sport to normalize its murders and gender apartheid regime. >> good to see you as always. breaking news now. the jury has reached a verdict in the seditious conspiracy trial for the oath keepers group. sarah is live, what do we know? >> reporter: we've got two reporters inside, hannah and holmes, both sending out information to me. that's how i'm getting it at this point. we have now heard from the judge, who said we received a note from our jury that simply says verdict reached. that is from the judge. we know that there are several attorneys, of course, from the defense that are there, that one of the attorneys still has not made it into the courtroom, but all the defendants have now entered into the courtroom. the judge then repeated that there is a jury that has -- the

jury has reached a verdict. and so we are waiting to hear what that verdict is. there are quite a few charges, so this will take a bit of time because for each and every charge they have to determine which person is or is not guilty of the charge. and so that's why this will take a little bit of time. not all of the defendants, and there are five of them, are charged with the same things. some are charged with fewer things. some are charged with the full ten. so we will be waiting to hear each and every charge for each and every defendant in this case, and jake, as you know, each defendant in this case has their own story about what they say happened. they have their own defense in this case, and they've put those cases on throughout the past seven weeks of testimony, jake. >> interrupt you for a second, because this is breaking news, and we do understand that stewart rhodes, the ring leader of the oath keepers, has been found guilty of seditious conspiracy. stewart rhodes, the leader of

the oath keepers, has been found guilty of seditious conspiracy, sara. >> reporter: that's right. and basically what the jury looked at there is they looked at a couple of different things. first it was like do you find that the government proved beyond a reasonable doubt there was the existence of a conspiracy charge in count one. that conspiracy charge was seditious conspiracy, and they had to determine, one, was the goal to oppose by force the authority of the government, of the united states, and two, to use force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the united states. this is huge. the government, the jury says, has proven its case against the founder of the oath keepers, elmer stewart rhodes iii. he has argued that basically there was no plan to do so but that he believed neither joe biden nor president donald

trump, who he clearly backed, won the election, because he felt like it was unconstitutional. and that's what he told the jury. well, the jury did not buy it. and this is a very big win that cannot be understated for the prosecution. the jury has come back and said that in the charge of seditious conspiracy elmer stewart rhodes iii is guilty, and we are waiting on the next few people because now they'll go to the next four people who are charged with this same charge, which comes, by the way, with an up to 20-year maximum sentence. a maximum prison sentence of 20 yours. this is a big deal and a big win for the government, jake? >> sara, stick around, we need more reporting from you on the other four. there are obviously other charges, but as you note, this is a big deal. the justice department getting a guilty verdict in the seditious conspiracy trial of at least we have the verdict for stewart rhodes, the leader of the oath keepers, who has been found guilty of seditious conspiracy.

what does that mean? let's bring in ellie, julia, and ronato. ellie, let me start with you. what does this mean to the average man, woman, child walking down the street, an oath keep has been found guilty of seditious conspiracy, which we've been saying for months is not an easy charge to get a guilty verdict of, what does this mean? >> jake, this is a historic verdict. this is a monumental victory for the justice department. as you said, charges of seditious conspiracy are exceedingly serious and exceedingly rare. before these january 6th cases it has been over a decade since doj tried to charge seditious conspiracy, and that chase was unsuccessful. you have to go back two decades plus to find a jury trial in the federal system that resulted in a conviction for seditious conspiracy. and that involved a foreign terrorist organization plotting attacks on a series of landmarks in new york city. so this is extraordinarily rare, and it really vindicates doj's

theory here. seditious conspiracy means to plot to use force to overthrow the government or to interfere with a lawful function of government, here the counting of electoral votes by congress, it doesn't get more fundamental for our democracy than that. so this is a huge win for doj and really a vindication of their legal theory. >> i want to bring in ronato and jewel yet juliet in a second. so sara, you brought us the news, seditious conspiracy charges, stewart rhodes, the leader of the oath keepers, has been found guilty of seditious conspiracy. what about the other four defendants? >> reporter: okay, so we have just gotten the verdict for the other four defendants in the seditious conspiracy case. we are hearing the foreman says that kelly meggs, who was a member of the oath keepers, guilty. we are hearinging jessica

watkins, not guilty. harlz, not guilty. in this case, stewart rhodes, who was -- is the founder of the oath keepers, guilty. and someone who they believe was one of his top lieutenants, kelly meggs, guilty in this case. by the way, kelly meggs' wife has also been brought up in charges. so this is a very interesting difference here. because, like i told you earlier, each of the defendants had a story about why they were there and what they were doing and whether or not they planned to forcefully stop the peaceful transfer of power. this changes things a bit for the doj. this was a huge case that cannot be understated. it is the first case where seditious conspiracy charges went to trial. they have now gotten two guilty verdicts, both stewart rhodes, the founder of the oath keepers, and one of his lieutenants, kelly meggs, both guilty. but the other defendants, the other three defendants, not

guilty the jury says. i've just gotten in a little bit more information about count two, which is conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding. stewart rhodes, not guilty. kelly meggs, guilty. kenneth harrelson, also not guilty. jessica watkins, guilty. and thomas caldwell, not guilty. so so far what you're seeing here is there are a couple of people, kenneth harrelson and mr. caldwell, thomas caldwell, both not guilty on two of the conspiracy charges. so you're seeing sort of the jury going through each and every one of these and trying to decide, okay, did this happen, in your opinion, did the government prove its case. so it's a mixed bag for the government. and i'm sure at this point for mr. caldwell's attorney, who's not guilty on two of the charges, that they are happy to hear that from the jury. now, jake, i do want to mention

that this is the first of about 20 cases in the january 6th attack on the capitol that shocked the -- america and the world where there is a conspiracy charge. about 20 cases will go to trial where there's a conspiracy charge. this was the first one with seditious conspiracy, one of the most serious charges. we have just gotten another decision by the jury in another of the up to ten charges. count number three, which is obstructing an official proceeding and either stopping an official proceeding by obstructing it, stewart rhodes, guilty. kelly meggs, considered one of his top lieutenants, guilty. kenneth harrelson, guilty. jessica watkins, guilty. and thomas caldwell, guilty. so this is the first charge where everyone who has been charged, and this is the obstruction of official proceeding, everyone who has been charged with count three has been found guilty by this

jury. we are getting the rest of the charges in. if you don't mind, i will go through them with you. and if you would like to bring in our analyst eli, i know he has deep charges of what these mean. i will gather the rest of the charges as you are speaking with him. >> that sounds great. i think we have enough to chew on with our legal experts. to reiterate, we have two charges of seditious conspiracy, two guilty charges for stewart rhodes and kelly meggs, who i guess is his deputy. the other three defendants not guilty on seditious conspiracy. then there was a disrupting the transfer of power. that was a mixed bag. some were found guilty, some were found not guilty. and then obstructing an official proceeding, all five of the defendants were found guilty. that's what we know right now. ronato, walk us through what you see going on here. >> well, what we see, jake, is a jury that's very carefully

considering the evidence as to each count and every specific defendant, which by the way, is how it's supposed to work in our system when you have a joint trial, that's exactly how the system is supposed to work. i actually think it's a very good thing for the justice department, because it's going to make it, in many ways, this verdict very defensible. ultimately, at the end of the day, the jury took a very close look at each one of these defendants, and you know, there is a saying we had as prosecutors -- one defendant, one count. in other words, for some of these defendants, even if they were found not guilty of certain things, at the end of the day, they're being found guilty of at least one very serious felony. so the judge, once that happens, the judge is going to be able to consider all the history and characteristics of the defendant, all of the nature and circumstances of this offense, and give a sentence based on all of that regardless of what the charge was. so i think it's a win for the justice department that they have a guilty verdict as to all the defendants for a serious

felony. and as to seditious conspiracy, i think it shows the jury was considering these defenses, which by the way, jake, were inconsistent with each other. i mean, each defendant had their own spin that they were giving, which usually helps the justice department, because those are not necessarily aligned with each other. i think what they did here was they credited, some of those defendants -- or a supposed associate, but as to the people at the very top, they were willing to hold the top two people in the oath keeps responsible. >> as you note, all five have been found guilty of at least one felony, which is disrupting or obstructing an official proceeding. and juliet, for people who might not remember about a year or so ago, a lot of donald trump and the insurrectionist's defenders in politics and defenders in maga media were saying things along the lines of if this was so serious where are the seditious conspiracy charges,

and of course, then the justice department brought them. explain how this guilty verdict fills in the bigger picture of what happened during the deadly riot on january 6th. does this say, look, this was a conspiracy, this was planned? >> exactly. so this was, of course a good day for the department of justice. you don't see me smile much. this is a really great day for the united states, for the rule of law, for the peaceful transfer of power and making sure that that is protected, because that is essentially what was on trial. this verdict we're going to have to drill down, because there's the different counts are related to what the intent was in terms of its obstruction, delay. but the overall charge against, in particular, stewart rhodes, is monumental because it is saying to the world that this was, one word, conspiracy, more than one. it is not a bunch of guys vacationing and deciding to get a little bit disruptive.

it was planned before, during, and possibly after to disrupt the peaceful transfer of power. we have to figure out exactly what each count relates to in terms of the guilty verdict. so it is not just a statement to those defendants, it's a statement to potentially future defendants. this is how these cases, this is how violent organizations die, which is a good thing. they get disrupted at the top. they turn on each other, which is what we saw in this case. they have no trust amongst each other, and they know that they have now been exposed. and so these other cases that sara was talking about that are down the pipeline in terms of who knew what together. that's the keyword here, together, conspiracy, a unified intent. people will start to get nervous, and they will take more pleas or they will take pleas that are being offered by the department of justice. and the extent to which this was

organized by oath keeps, other violent organizations, and their connections to the focus of the january 6th committee, which is, of course, the white house, will continue to be exposed. i guess i'll put it this way, this was a big deal. it is a big deal for the rule of law and the peaceful transfer of power. the opposite would have been very bad, i think, for not just the department of justice but for incitement and violence. people would have thought they could have gotten away with it. >> eli, how will this impact, to you think, other legal battles over the january 6th insurrection? >> jake, i assure you the other defendants are watching this verdict carefully. of course, every case stands on its own, the fact there were convictions in this case does not necessarily mean other people will be convicted if they go to trial, but it sends a message. the jury here rejected the defenses this was idle chatter. they rejected the defenses this was a petty offense or not serious. the jury here found all five

guilty on trying to obstruct an official proceeding. that's the third count, all five defendants have been found guilty. all five of them are either in jail or going to jail. and jake, i want to point this out. if people are wondering how could there be not guilty verdicts as to the bottom three defendants on the seditious conspiracy charges but guilty verdicts as to obstruction of an official proceeding charges, the difference there is the use of force. what distinguishes seditious conspiracy is that they're plotting to use force. and so the jury found that, yes, the top two defendants, stewart rhodes and kelly meggs, they were in on a plan to use force. the evidence here involved amassing weapons and attack plans. but the other three defendants, yes, they were part of a plan to obstruct congress but not necessarily by using force. so big picture, this is a win for prosecutors. it's a win for doj, and the jury clearly was very careful and went count by count and defendant by defendant here. >> all right, hold on right now, because we're going to go back to sara at the courthouse for more information on this breaking news story. sara, just to get people up to

speed, people who are watching right now at home, there has been -- there have been verdicts in the trial of the oath keepers. two of the five defendants have been found guilty of seditious conspiracy. that is the biggest and weightiest charge. stewart rhodes, the leader, and his deputy, kelly meggs, have been found guilty of that. a mixed bag for the disruption of power and all five found guilty of obstructing an official proceeding. tell us more. >> reporter: so remember in the -- when we were talking earlier, jake, and i was saying, look, some of the defendants are charged with different things. not all of them were charged with all of the different counts that the prosecution brought. so in one of those charges, which was count four, conspiracy to prevent an officer from discharging any duties, stewart rhodes, the leader and founder of the oath keeps, was found not guilty. kelly meggs, one of his top lieutenants, according to the prosecution, was found guilty in that charge. now, there was another charge

underneath this to prevent a member of congress from discharging a duty. that was another charge, kenneth harrelson found guilty of that, and jessica watkins found guilty of that. i can give you a little background on potentially why the jury found stewart rhodes not guilty in this charge. because stewart rhodes did not go into the capitol. he was one of the people that did not go into the capitol, that was not seen in the capitol pushing against police, pushing into -- in through the doors on that january 6th day. and so the jury may have thought that that was not something that he -- that he was capable of doing to prevent an officer from discharging his duties. and then when you look sort of down, kelly meggs did go into the capitol. kenneth harrelson was a person who you didn't hear from in this case. three of the defendants, by the way, jake, spoke on their own behalf. and we talked about that earlier, including the founder of the oath keepers, stewart rhodes. he was the first defendant to

take the stand. so did jessica watkins, a former army veteran. she was transgender, trying to fit in, and did something that she said was a dumb -- move. she was being a quote dumb -- as she told the jury. but she did not try to stop the peaceful transfer of power. she was, though, found guilty by preventing a member from congress from discharging a duty. she was in the capitol and on camera, that she took herself by the way, a selfie of her going we just stormed the capitol, we're in the efing capitol. so some of the evidence is the words of the people who are the defendants, much of it, really, the messaging between the different members of this group. and so the jury looked at a whole lot of evidence, jake, i cannot stress that enough. seven weeks of testimony in this case that this jury has gone through, jake. >> all right, sara, we'll come back to you, thank you so much.

if you're just tuning in, there has been some breaking news, some guilty verdicts in the trial of the five oath keepers, including the ringleader, stewart rhodes, who has been found guilty of seditious conspiracy as well as guilty of obstructing an official proceeding. all five defendants, in fact, found guilty of obstructing an official proceeding. and two found guilty of seditious conspiracy. juliette, what does this mean for other far right groups? do you think this will be a deterrent? what more? >> yes. absolutely. look, we can focus on the noise and people on twitter and people being hateful and the potential violence, but what we need to look at is whether these organizations have a capacity to grow. and what we've seen since january 6th and certainly because of this verdict is their capacity in terms of whether

their leadership is able to do it, are they able to raise funds, these organizations need fees to keep themselves going, to keep themselves online, to keep themselves organized. and whether they're able to recruit. all will be harmed significantly by this verdict. in particular recruitment. recruitment, you can call this group whatever you want, right wing, domestic terrorism, organizations like this thrive with the victory. in other words, they convince potential adherence, potential recruits that they are on the winning team. this is true of violent organizations and groups throughout the world. that narrative, they had that narrative when trump was supporting them. they had that narrative going into january 6th. they no longer have that narrative. and so if you think of just the long-term trajectory of right wing extremist organized groups. i'm not talking about, there's going to be the one offs, violent people, hateful people online, but in terms of organizing and the capacity of

these groups to organize a huge hit today. they are looking at this and these organizations are basically over. they may reform in other names, and we keep an eye on them, but nothing like what we've seen before because their capacity to grow has been severely limited. and stewart rhodes deserves to go to jail for a long time because of -- because he led what the jury found to be a true conspiracy. >> and ronato, one of the things that's interesting about this case, not this case in particular, but the seditious conspiracy trials, the other one of the proud boys, which is a different far right militia, but there was video we've seen of the two groups making peace for this seditious effort, that's the group that when donald trump during one of the presidential debates was asked to tell them to stand down he said instead, stand back and standby. we know that oath keeps were in

contact with individuals close to former president trump, including roger stone and michael flynn. how might this verdict today, this guilty verdict for two of the five seditious conspiracy and guilty for all five for obstructing official proceedings. a potential 20 years in prison each for the seditious conspiracy charge. how could this impact donald trump's associates like roger stone and mike flynn? >> well, they have to be concerned, because -- particularly the individuals, like you said, roger stone, who have very specific and personal ties to these groups. you know, jake, when i represent clients who are, you know, part of a series of cases that are getting charged, i usually track the different cases and sentences and the results in a spreadsheet and keep my clients up to date on how all those

cases are going, working their way through the courts. if i represented roger stone here and i was giving him advice, i would tell him, you know, we need to be very concerned about your involvement, your relationships with these groups. you know, we know there's an ongoing january 6th investigation. you don't want yourself to get caught up in a seditious conspiracy charge. i mean, what i think the justice department proved today is they can try seditious conspiracy cases, and they can win and get a conviction on these facts, on the january 6th conspiracy. and i think that's -- that's something that was a question mark up until now. there was doubters out there. and everyone associated with the january 6th conspirators i think have to take note of that and be concerned. >> and eli, i would assume -- and look, i don't know that there was any in trump's orbit that told the oath keepers to do this or coordinated with them to do this, or the proud boys, but

if there were, that's the case the january 6th hearing is trying to make, and that's certainly what's being investigated by the justice department right now, if there were, i would think that kelly meggs and stewart rhodes, who were just convicted, found guilty on seditious conspiracy, which carries a potential sentence of 20 years in prison, not to mention the other three who were found guilty when it comes to obstructing an official proceeding. i would assume some of these people are looking to make a deal. some of these people are going to have their lawyers go to the justice department and say, i have more information, i don't want to go to prison. >> i think you're exactly right, jake. and i do want to be clear. typically people cooperate before they've gone to trial. however, it does happen that people get convicted, as we've just seen, and then cooperate. as you note, the incentives are very different now if you are stewart rhodes or kelly meggs. you are being held in prison waiting for this trial. now you've been convicted. you are going to be locked up for up to 20 years. now you're doing the math and

thinking, well, perhaps i need to help myself. if that's the case, if stewart rhodes or kelly meggs has a change of heart and a conviction by a jury certainly can change a person's heart, you make a call to prosecutors. the way this works, jake, if you want to cooperate in the federal system, it's all or nothing. you can't be selective about who you cooperate against or what information you give, you have to give everything. if i'm a prosecutor, i'd be interested in hearing what they have to say. if it's useful and interesting and actionable, perhaps they'd be in position to cooperate against others. >> i'm going to go back to sara outside the courthouse right now, sara, what can you tell us? >> reporter: we have the last of the charges. and jake, the verdict is complete now. the jury has made its decision. it has made its judgement after seven weeks of listening to testimony and three days of going over that testimony. and we are getting the last few verdicts in. for count five, the obstruction of government property and aiding and abetting, kelly meggs

found not guilty, kenneth harrelson, not guilty, and jessica watkins, not guilty. all not guilty on that charge. they have all been found guilty on other charges, so there will be some jail time here. but when it comes to destroying government property, the jury did not see that in the videos, in the text messages. they just simply decided that is not -- they did not prove their case, the federal government. and lastly, there's a civil disorder and aiding and abetting. jessica watkins was the only person charged with that. she was found guilty. and the last charges are all obstruction charges in different versions. and what we are getting know is that rhodes has been found guilty of that as well. kelly meggs, guilty, kenneth harrelson guilty, and thomas caldwell guilty. thomas caldwell is the only person we've seen in court who gets to leave every day. he gets to go home. the judge is going to keep that in place. he generally comes in with a cane. keep that in place, he can go

home until the sentencing, according to the judge. so that's where we are right now. the rest of them will be remanded. they have been already in jail awaiting the jury's decision. and then there will be a sentencing eventually. and obviously, the most serious charges are the first two. the first one was seditious conspiracy, which comes with up to a 20-year prison sentence, maximum. and the second one, conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, that too, by the way, comes with up to a 20-year sentence. and several people were convicted of that that were not convicted of seditious conspiracy, the most rare and serious charge. so there's a lot of jail time that could be handed down. i should say prison time that could be handed down by the judge. i do want to say this to you, that this trial, the length of it, the weight of it, you could definitely feel it on a day-to-day basis. the weight of this trial and the

people here of d.c. who watched people storm into the capitol, breaking down doors, looking for members of congress, talking about hanging them and hurting them and stopping them from doing their official duties. this has been an incredibly heavy weight for this jury to go through, to listen to, to see over and over and over again over these past seven weeks. the judge has always recognized that in this case -- and he said this to the attorneys once the jury left -- he said he thanked them all. he said if anyone wants proof that the american system and the justice system can work, all they have to do is sit and watch this case. so the judge praising the attorneys, all of them, prosecutors and defense, in this, making the point that this is the way america should function. it should not function the way it did on january 6th. the people breaking into the capitol, jake? >> sara, i know this is all coming fast and furious, right now do you have the where with

all and the information, and again, i know you're getting all this -- it's a breaking news situation. if i go through the names of the defendants, can you tell me what they have been found guilty of and what they have been found not guilty of if we do it defendant by defendant. >> reporter: we can try, we can try. >> let's try it. live tv, folks, so have a heart. let's start with stewart rhodes. >> reporter: there are no guarantees i'm going to be perfect. >> no, no, right now we're looking at the defendants. stewart rhodes is the guy with the eye patch. he accidentally shot out his own eye. he's the leader of the far right oath keepers group. what has he been found guilty of, what has he been found not guilty of? >> reporter: so we know he has been found guilty, the leader of the oath keepers, has been found guilty of seditious conspiracy. he's been found not guilty of conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding. he has been found guilty of obstructing an official proceeding. he has been found not guilty of

conspireing to prevent an officer from discharging any duties. and he has been found guilty of several obstruction counts. there are several counts that round out the charges. so in three different spots, he's been found guilty, the most important, obviously, is the seditious conspiracy charge. that is a very, very, very big deal. not only for him and the government but for this group that he formed in 2009 in the wake of president obama's rise to the presidency. >> right, okay, so that's guilty of -- stewart rhodes guilty of seditious conspiracy, obstructing an official proceeding, and what's the third one? >> reporter: it is another obstruction charge. >> okay. >> reporter: there are several obstruction counts, and he was found guilty, along with meggs, harrison, and caldwell. >> okay. kelly meggs, the deputy oath keeper. i think he's the head of the

oath keepers in florida, he was also found guilty of seditious conspiracy, what else has he been found guilty or not guilty of? >> reporter: he was found guilty of seditious conspiracy, the most serious charge. when it comes to conspiracy to obstruct an official proceedings, meggs, unlike the leader of the oath keeper, rhodes, was found guilty. that brings the heaviest amount of prison time. he was found guilty on the third charge, obstructing an official proceeding. remember, rhodes didn't go into the capitol. but kelly meggs did, and there is video of him doing so. so some of this has to do with that. the fourth count, conspiracy to prevent an officer from discharging any duties, kelly meggs also found guilty. he has been found guilty of more counts than i think any other person in this case defending themselves against these charges. and he was also, let me see, i'm

going down here, found guilty of other obstruction counts. so he is probably the only not guilty charge that he was found not guilty of, thomas caldwell was found not guilty of preventing a member of congress from discharging a duty. >> we'll get to caldwell in a second. >> reporter: that's where we're at. i'm sorry, meggs, i apologize. >> you keep saying obstructing an official proceeding when i think you mean disrupting a transfer of power. kelly meggs -- >> reporter: there are two. >> there are two different ones. stewart rhodes found guilty of seditious conspiracy and obstructing an official proceeding and another obstruction count. kelly meggs is deputy, found guilty of seditious conspiracy, was he found guilty of disrupting transfer of power? >> reporter: he was found guilty of count two, conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding.

that is kelly meggs. not stewart rhodes. >> not stewart rhodes, right. >> reporter: that's just the seditious conspiracy, correct, yeah. >> the reason i want to do all this is i want to make sure our legal experts understand all of this. i'll go back to them and then to you in a second. when of the things i want to ask you, the sentences here, they don't have to be concurrent, they can be consecutive. also found guilty of obstructing an official proceeding, does that carry a 20-year sentence as well. >> i believe it does, jake, yeah. those sentences can be run concurrentlyly or back to back. judge will take the core of the conduct and say which of these conducts is more or less the same plot. usually those get run at the same time. one thing that's a kicker here is several have been charged

with obstruction of justice. basically the underlying facts were that they had certain text messages they deleted or told others to delete. that usually bumps the sentence up by a year or so. so it's hard to say exactly what they're looking at, seditious conspiracy charges are very rare, but with respect to the top two defendants here, with respect to stewart rhodes and kelly meggs their sentence is going to be driven by the seditious conspiracy charges. max of 20. i think it's likely they end up in the double digits here. these are serious charges. >> everyone stick around, we have more on our breaking news out of this trial. we're going to squeeze in a quick break. we'll be right back. stay with us. but at the end of the day, you know you have a teteam behid you that can help you. not having to worry about the future makes it possible to make the present as best as it can be for everybody.

(pensive music) (footsteps crunching) (pensive music) (birds tweeting) (pensive music) (broom sweeping) - [narrator] one in five children worldwide are faced with the reality of living without food. no family dinners, no special treats, no full bellies.

all around the world, parents are struggling to feed their children. toddlers are suffering from acute malnutrition, which stunts their growth. kids are forced to drop out of school so they can help support their families. covid, conflict, inflation and climate have ignited the worst famine in our lifetime. and we're fed up. fed up with the fact that hunger robs children of their childhood. fed up with the lack of progress. fed up with the injustice. help us brighten the lives of children all over the world by visiting getfedupnow.org. for as little as $10 a month, you can join save the children as we support children and families in desperate need of our help. now is the time to get fed up and give back. when you join the cause, your $10 monthly donation can help communities in need of life-saving treatments and nutrients, prevent children from dropping out of school. support our work with communities and governments

to help children go from short-term surviving to long-term thriving. and now thanks to special government grants, every dollar you give before december 31st can multiply up to 10 times the impact. that means more food, water, medicine and help for kids around the world. you'll also receive a free tote bag to share your support for children in need. childhood without food is unimaginable. get fed up. call us now or visit getfedupnow.org today.

we're back with our breaking news coverage. a jury finding just a few minutes ago the leader of the far right oath keepers group guilty of seditious conspiracy along with his deputy, kelly meggs. this, of course, over their role in the january 6th capitol insurrection. three other members of the oath keepers found guilty on other related charges. let's bring in michael. michael was a d.c. police officer who was at the capitol on january 6th, was beaten unconscious on the day of the

attack. and michael, michael, i want to -- michael, your reaction to the jury's verdict. >> well, jake, the first thing. >> hang on one second, michael. >> also want to say we're thankful for the judge and his presiding over the trial. and so we come to this day. it's a mixed bag. there are good results and bad results mixed together. we're grateful for the not guilty verdicts that were received. we're disappointed in the guilty verdicts. if you look at these charges, there were many charges levelled against our client, mr. rhodes, and all the other clients, i assume some of the other lawyers will talk to you about their clients, but we certainly are thankful for the not guilty verdicts that mr. rhodes received. we're disappointed with the

guilty verdict. we feel like that we presented a case which showed through evidence and testimony that mr. rhodes did not commit the crime of seditious conspiracy. there was no evidence introduced to indicate that there was a plan to attack the capitol. so i just want to say that we are grateful for the opportunity we've had to present the evidence on behalf of our client mr. rhodes, and we'll take your questions. mr. bright? >> after ten weeks of work, i think you actually said it all. >> of course. excuse me. can you move. jesus, i hate this town. we do, we're appreciative, thank you very much. it's been a long ten weeks. i'm ready to get back to texas without question. i think ed said a lot of it, but

the government did a good job, they took us to task. >> those attorneys representing individuals found guilty of seditious conspiracy trying to put their best face on pretty tough verdict. let's bring back michael, one of the heroes of january 6, 2021, one of the police officers beat unconscious by the rioting mobs. michael, sorry for interrupting before. what is your reaction to the jury's verdict. it looks like some of these individuals could theoretically end up with sentences of 20 or even more years in prison. >> yeah, jake, my first reaction was it couldn't have happened to a nicer group of people. but seriously, i think, well, i would hope that this would serve as a learning tool for many

members of congress and many americans who don't believe that january 6th was serious, that it was a serious attack on our democracy. many members have said that where are the seditious conspiracy charges, well, there they are, and they were >> yeah, absolutely. you try to meet with guilty of insurrection burdick showin jury found him guilty of conspiracy and of obstructing a proceeding and other obstruction charges. what would you say to those leaders? i know you try to meet with house leader kevin mccarthy, several times and found it unsatisfactory. what would you say to kevin mccarthy?

>> i don't have anything to say . i think the verdict speaks for itself and the evidence put forth by the government prove beyond a reasonable doubt that stewart rhodes and at least one conspirator engaged in a seditious conspiracy to overthrow the united states government by means of violence . and, i think the select committee did an outstanding job of showing selections between the former president's administration allies within the administration and leaders of these groups. so, if i was the former president and many of his allies, i would be shaking in my boots seeing these burdick's coming down. >> there were other officers at the capitol on the day of insurrection and you have gone

to capitol hill. how important is it for you in law enforcement to show up on days such as this? >> i think it varies from officer to officer and i would love to be there. every time i show up at the federal courthouse, it becomes a fiasco and so i have agreed to stay away outside of the actual trials that involved me as a government witness or as a very dim. that said, i know quite a few officers who have participated in dozens of these hearings and some even more. >> you and three other officers were at many of the january 6th hearings. i am wondering -- i don't know if you are texting with them, but i wonder how your band of brothers is reacting to the verdicts.

>> i will be honest with you that i was not paying any attention whatsoever. other than when i was asked to call in. that being said, i'm pleasantly surprised. >> gloria, the democratic congressman just tweeted this. for nearly 2 years the republicans have downplayed the attacks on the i january 6th. calling a political pay recourse by patriots and donald trump has given pardons for the january 6th patriots. these guys were just found guilty of a number of charges and two of them found guilty of seditious conspiracy. will this impact the house republicans who have

downplayed this? >> probably not. when you look at the case, it was a carefully considered jury who didn't say across the board everyone was guilty or not guilty of the same thing. in the end, for stewart rhodes , in particular, it made the case -- i should say accepted the case that the violence on january 6 was the product of an organized conspiracy. not everyone participated in the same way and not everybody did the same thing. some folks did not go to the capital. stewart rhodes did not go to the capital . what you hear from a lot of republicans was this was not organized in any way, shape, or form. the president has said he would consider full pardons for the rioters and i don't know what he is thinking now and what he

would say about those in january 6th but a jury of fellow citizens after careful consideration said that yes it was. >> what do you think. >> who is had a worse history than donald trump. it all comes back to election denial. the independent voters two weeks ago rejected trumpism . the republicans did worse than expected in mid term elections and many election deniers failed and many candidates of his failed as well. and joe biden spoke about democracy and the need to save democracy. what happened today, that data point is another indication the party is moving away from donald trump. >> hate and extremism. we just

came out of the most extraordinary election in history and why? the american people slammed the brakes on a party that had no power. still the voters said -- i understand slamming on the brakes when your party has any of those things that we have never let the voters say, not let's not them get behind the wheel. and the tweet you reference is really important. people have been lied to. it was a lie went they said it was antifa or black lives matter. it was an ultra right-wing group . it was alive when donald trump said there was love in the air. there wasn't long when they beat a man and caused a heart attack. understand that when you have been told this was peaceful lower left wing, you are lied to.

>> speaking of which, on the subject of republicans and extremism, something happened today. it took almost a week but we have more republicans speaking out about the holocaust anti-semitic racist. and for sixth days kevin mccarthy didn't say anything about this. even though other people have come out and condemned it including vice president mike prints mike pence . here is what he had to say about donald trump and fuentes . >> i think donald trump came out four times and condemned him and didn't know who he was. >> that's not true. donald

trump hasn't even come out wants to condemn fuentes. he did say he didn't know who he was and that part is true. everything else with president trump coming out four times but he is either mistaking or lying . >> frankly, i hate that we have to talk about donald trump and who he has dinner with. he did something as former president of the united states and this is a clear-cut case and unfortunately is taken so long for folks to get an answer. >> tried being jewish. there is a lot of bankston this is not a conversation. there is anxiety among people that donald trump is openly meeting with the holocaust denier. >> and so few of the republicans in leadership. now they are coming out.

>> i think donald trump is not condemn this. >> kevin mccarthy wants to be the speaker. we understand he is not yet the speaker and wants to keep a certain part of his party with him and that explains some of his reticence there which is absurd. >> i saw something tweeted earlier today about whether or not -- have republican officials finally had enough? you are upholster, where are republicans? >> i have been asked is this the thing and it has never been the thing. the only thing is republicans are wounded out of the midterm and they are looking for reasons to get rid of this guy and move on and this is the only reason it could be different than the million

other times i've been asked that. >> i feel like i have resisted asking you this until now. >> that's okay. >> we talked about extremism and stewart rhodes . as far as i know, nick fuentes is not a violent person but his thoughts and deeds are hideous . >> i don't know that mr. fuentes has ever advocated violence , but i did look up some of his tapes. with mr. fuentes submit sneering about the holocaust . to read about the first to escape from auschwitz and it's a terrific book. if you want to know the truth, particularly for catholic boys like me from taxes, check it out. >> coverage continues now and breonna keilar is in for wolf.