Week of June 28th 2021 - Episode 5 - Terrorism, Treason and Sedition

This week I cover the recently released video of the assault on Nathaniel Pinkney as well as other current events.

Hello and welcome to The Breakdown with Benjamin Nowain for the week of June 28, 2021.

This show is going to be a little different. In addition to the weeklies, we're going to do an in-depth look at one of last week's stories, along with the breakdown subject of the week.

Right now, let's get to the weekly.

Shortly after my last report, Elizabeth Bailey was arrested on accessory charges for the attack on the Shasta County resident known as Bob, as well as accessory to her involvement in the assault on Nathaniel Pinkney.

At Tuesday's Board of Supervisors meeting, Kathy Stainbrook gave a recount of her assault from the previous week. Kathy, who is a recall proponent for the three supervisors, was critical of Supervisors Mary Rickert, Joe Chimenti, and Leonard Mody for not reaching out to her to see if she was okay. As a reminder, Kathy's attacker Brad Hart was arrested within two hours of the incident.

Kathy proceeded to lay blame for the attack on the supervisors for emboldening the LGBTQ+ community with the Pride Month proclamation they voted on June 8th.

During that same meeting, during public comment, Nathaniel Pinkney asked District 4 Supervisor Patrick Jones a question regarding how Carlos Zapata turned in his guns, which was required by court order due to the temporary restraining order Nathaniel has against him.

What follows is an extraordinary exchange:

There is no evidence to support Patrick Jones' statement.

Shortly after news broke that Carlos Zapata is facing battery and disturbing the peace charges, his sister-in-law Mary Beth Martinez shared an LA Times article along with a comment about her displeasure with her sister's husband. She states that her sister, Rebecca Zapata, is no longer someone she recognizes.

The footage that was withheld from Nathaniel was finally released to his lawyer and was then made available publicly. The footage was taken from security cameras at the Market Street Blade and Barrel on May 4th. This shot shows Carlos Zapata entering the establishment; however, he seats himself out of frame. Carlos allegedly throws a glass at Nathaniel, which happens off-camera. After being told to leave the establishment, he and his wife leave.

Footage taken in the back of the restaurant shows Chris Meagher walking around back prior to Nathaniel’s assault. Later in this same location, three individuals approach Nathaniel and one of his associates. They were positively identified as Elizabeth Bailey, Chris Meagher, and Carlos Zapata.

As Nathaniel reenters the building, Elizabeth attempts to pull Nathaniel back by his shirt, and then Chris strikes Nathaniel with a closed fist, to which a co-worker returns a strike of his own. As they retreat, Chris picks up a CO2 container as if he was going to assault someone with it. Another employee approaches, and they both leave.

While Carlos did not physically assault Nathaniel in this part of the altercation, he clearly approached along with Elizabeth and Chris, as shown in the footage. Carlos made a statement that the footage would show him pulling Chris and Elizabeth away from Nathaniel. The footage does not appear to show this, and it is unclear why Carlos would approach the back of the Market Street Blade and Barrel on foot with Nathaniel’s two assailants, to then state he was Nathaniel’s protector.

This footage is in direct conflict with previous statements that Carlos has made regarding the incident. He originally asserted that he didn’t know the other two people that assaulted him, however, in addition to walking up with them, Elizabeth Bailey is one of his employees at the Palomino Room.

The footage release also directly refutes a police statement released to the public on May 17th. Key elements were not correct, such as Nathaniel following Carlos to his second location, which did not occur. Rob Garnero wrote this press release, which the LA Times initially confirmed inconsistencies with Police Captain Poletski. The LA Times article was published on May 19th. As of this moment, the police press release has not been retracted, nor has a statement been released since the footage has been made available to the public.

Carlos’ arraignment is currently set for July 12th. He is being charged with battery and disturbing the peace. Red White and Blueprint released a statement on their Facebook page about their version of events. They made a public call to action for, quote, "all patriots of Shasta County to peacefully stand with Carlos at his arraignment on July 12th at 8:30 a.m. at the Shasta County Courthouse."

Woody Clendenen, Cottonwood Militia leader, also made a statement of his own on Sunday, requesting that people show up to a protest at the Shasta County Courthouse at 5 p.m. on Wednesday, July 7th, to protest, specifically calling out District Attorney

Stephanie Bridgett for what he called intimidation of recall supporters.

And now, the breakdown.

This week’s breakdown is on a somewhat controversial subject: terrorism, treason, and sedition.

In the United States Constitution, the act of treason is defined in Article 3, Section 3, as an act of betraying one’s own country by means of levying war or giving aid or comfort to enemies.

Sedition is defined as conduct or speech inciting people to rebel against the authority of a state. It has a complicated history in the U.S., having been used sparingly due to concerns over First Amendment rights.

Terrorism is defined in the Code of Federal Regulations as the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, civilian population, or any segment thereof.

The reason I bring this up is that in Shasta County, we've been seeing increasing numbers of these types of behaviors.

Whether or not they rise to the level of these definitions, I will leave up to you, the viewer.

Take for example on January 5th of this year at the Board of Supervisors Chambers. Previously, on December 15th, the Board voted on a resolution to keep the Chambers closed to the public, choosing to do virtual meetings due to the evolving pandemic situation. Acting against the Board's decision, Supervisors Les Baugh and Patrick Jones opened the door to the public. This decision gave validation to community members wishing to flout regulations and vent their frustrations.

However, the language used by some of the people who spoke borders on what I and many Shasta County community members believe to be seditious and treasonous language.

Listen to comments made by Timothy Fairfield of Shingletown:

The threats made to public officials meet the technical definition of both sedition and terrorism. The argument could also be made that the attending supervisors, Patrick Jones and Les Baugh, could be considered giving aid to individuals making threats during public comment, which would then be an act of treason.

In addition to that, Section 3 of the 14th Amendment states that any elected leader who has previously taken an oath and has given aid to those who have engaged in insurrection or rebellion will not be eligible for any public office, civil or military.

As mentioned in the Weekly, Patrick Jones stated at the June 29th board meeting during public comment that he considered Nathaniel Pinkney a domestic terrorist. I sought to mention it again, as I feel it is important to state how disparaging language from a leader can trickle down to their supporters.

In a post by Melissa Magana, you can see Cottonwood Militia leader Woody Clendenen repeat in a comment that Nathaniel is a domestic terrorist. In this second post by Melissa, she states that Nathaniel supports the rioters in a recent video that took place in Los Angeles, even though Nathaniel was not involved at all.

According to the Constitution, leaders have a responsibility to maintain a certain level of decorum. It is stated in the preamble of the Constitution to ensure domestic tranquility and to promote the general welfare, two things Patrick Jones' comments go directly against.

Many sentiments shared in Shasta County appear to be driven by national events. Just one day after the January 5th Shasta County board meeting, the insurrection at the Capitol in Washington, D.C. was alleged to be the result of seditious speech by Donald Trump and many of his supporters. To date, 545 people have been arrested and charged in the Capitol insurrection.

Red White and Blueprint co-founder Jon Knight posted on social media on January 9th that he attended the January 6th Capitol protest. He asserts that there were false flag actors dressed in pro-Trump branded clothing. There currently isn't any evidence to support that assertion.

One of Jon Knight's partners in the Red White and Blueprint, Carlos Zapata, is no stranger to this kind of rhetoric either.

These sentiments are becoming more common in Shasta County, which is likely due to the promotion of voices such as Carlos Zapata. He has been featured on InfoWars, where he's been seen speaking about the efficacy of violence in society.

These clips can be interpreted as seditious, as they seek to validate the position that violence against one's own government is acceptable if it is for a righteous purpose. These clips predate the inception of the Red White and Blueprint, a nine-part docuseries chronicling the recall of three Shasta County supervisors that is currently on its fourth episode.

In addition to Carlos' current legal troubles, he has a history of lashing out online when he feels slighted. The following are screenshots of threats he's made to a community member. This is a picture Carlos sent to his intended target, a photo of their driveway, and this is part of his exchange. Intimidation, again, is an example of terrorism.

Jesse Lane, a recall supporter and Red White and Blueprint cast member, has also made troubling statements and comments. Here is a public comment he made about A News Cafe reporter Doni Chamberlain, where he states, quote, "it is time we remove her from our way of living," end quote, due to displeasure with her reporting. Another example of threats that meet the definition of terrorism.

In another post, someone asks what happens if the recall doesn't work? Jesse replies, "then there is always plan B."

Indirectly related to the recall efforts, some community members have had their personal information leaked online. Things like their private information, phone number, or address. This is a method called doxing.

I myself was personally doxed last week following comments I made in a KRCR social media post. Shasta County resident Bill Pyatt commented on a thread on a public post I had made, stating Nathaniel Pinkney should be, quote, "skull stomped." He posted my phone number and street name, followed up with the fact that he could be at my residence within 10 minutes. Shortly after this exchange, he erased the post as well as blocked me.

Behavior like this online is becoming more and more common and is not acceptable. If you've been doxed, please keep screenshots and let the authorities know. Doxing is a form of intimidation designed to silence someone out of fear. It also meets the technical definition of terrorism. It is a crime according to HR 6478, the Interstate Doxing Prevention Act, which makes it a crime to knowingly publish or attempt to conspire to publish personally identifiable information. Violators are subject to criminal penalties such as a fine, a prison term up to five years, or both, as well as civil liability.

There are actually quite a few more examples, but for the sake of time, I will just say this:

Shasta County is not defined by this type of behavior. We are better than this. It is important that we keep a certain level of discourse in our republic. In addition to holding our leaders accountable, we must be held accountable as well.

As the 16th president, Abraham Lincoln, said in the Gettysburg Address, "a house divided cannot stand."

And that's the breakdown for the week of June 28th, 2021.