A former leader of the far-right Proud Boys extremist group was sentenced on Tuesday to more than three years behind bars for joining a plot to attack the U.S. Capitol nearly three years ago.

Charles Donohoe was the second Proud Boy to plead guilty to conspiring with other group members to obstruct the Jan. 6, 2021, joint session of Congress for certifying President Joe Biden’s electoral victory. His sentence could be a bellwether for other Proud Boys conspirators who agreed to cooperate with federal prosecutors.

Donohoe, 35, of Kernersville, North Carolina, apologized to his family, the law-enforcement officers who guarded the Capitol on Jan. 6 and “America as a whole” for his actions on Jan. 6.

“I knew what I was doing was illegal from the very moment those barricades got knocked down,” he said.

  • MagicShel@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    It’s now a legal finding or fact of law or whatever the term is. Anyway a court said it’s insurrection so that probably unclenched the sphincters of news editors a bit.

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      9 months ago

      Still pretty dystopian that they’re too cowardly to state the obvious without legal cover…

      • SCB@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        PBS isn’t a rag, but rather a news source. News sources should be objective. You can find endless commentary online about how shitty these people are.

        • grue@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          Calling Jan 6 an insurrection is stating an objective fact. It was always stating an objective fact, even before the court ruled on it.

          • SCB@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            It was always stating an objective fact, even before the court ruled on it.

            This would be irresponsible reporting when discussing an ongoing criminal case, however.