Jenny Cudd’s Pre- and Post-Riot Endorsement of a Revolution

Jenny Cudd and Eliel Rosa were charged with trespassing together by complaint on January 12 and arrested on January 13. The arrest affidavit tracked how the two of them walked together through the Capitol.

  • At approximately 2:35 p.m., Jenny Louise Cudd and Eliel Rosa, enter the U.S. Capitol via Upper West Terrace Door.
  • At approximately 2:36 p.m., Jenny Louise Cudd and Eliel Rosa are observed inside the Rotunda of the U.S. Capitol from the west side doorway that leads into the Rotunda. They are observed remaining inside the Rotunda until approximately 2:39 p.m. They are further observed taking pictures of the Rotunda and the surrounding area.
  • At approximately 2:39 p.m., Jenny Louise Cudd and Eliel Rosa are observed walking across the Statuary Hall area of the U.S. Capitol.
  • At approximately 2:40 p.m., Jenny Louise Cudd and Eliel Rosa are observed walking the Statuary Hall Connector and moves off camera at approximately 2:42 p.m.
  • At approximately 2:43 p.m., Jenny Louise Cudd and Eliel Rosa are observed departing from a large crowd inside the U.S. Capitol in front of the Main Door of the House Chamber and walks east toward the staircase.
  • Jenny Louise Cudd and Eliel Rosa are subsequently observed walking past the staircase and is further observed walking past the Upper House Door, going toward the other entrance to the House Chamber
  • Jenny Louise Cudd and Eliel Rosa are observed at approximately 2:54 p.m. at the Upper House Door and further observed departing the U.S. Capitol.

It described how Cudd filmed a video at the Willard after she returned, boasting that she was present when, “the new revolution started at the Capitol.”

Jenny Cudd stated on the Facebook video that she was at the Willard Hotel, located on 1401 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington D.C. 20004. During the course of the video she made the following comments to confirm the location and date of the video recording, “I am sitting in front of the Willard Hotel, as I always do when I am in DC protesting,” and “I was here today on January 6th when the new revolution started at the Capitol.”

It further described an interview Cudd did a few days later, boasting of her actions.

On January 8, 2021, Jenny Louise Cudd participated in an interview with a local news station in which she describes her actions on January 6, 2021, in Washington D.C., to include her admission of entering the U.S. Capitol on the same date. Specifically, Jenny Louise Cudd states during her interview she stated the following, “we walked up the steps and walked inside an open door (referring to the U.S. Capitol).” Jenny Louise Cudd further stated, “we the Patriots did storm the U.S. Capitol.” She added in reference to entering the U.S. Capitol, “Yes, I would absolutely do it again.”

As the arrest affidavit notes, the FBI also interviewed Rosa before arresting the two of them. He confirmed that the two of them had, indeed, entered the Capitol on January 6.

On January 8, 2021, Eliel Rosa was interviewed by the FBI in Midland, Texas. During the interview, Eliel Rosa admitted that he and Jenny Louise Cudd had entered the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021.

The arrest affidavit focused entirely on events of January 6 and thereafter. And while both Cudd and Rosa were implicated in trespassing, the most damning evidence in the affidavit came from Cudd’s own description of their activity.

On February 3, they were both indicted with their original trespassing charges, as well as obstruction of the vote count and abetting such obstruction.

In March, Cudd moved to sever her case from that of Rosa, arguing in part that by charging them together, the government was attempting, “to create the appearance of a conspiracy or plan.” Specifically, though, Cudd wanted to sever her case from Rosa’s both to prevent his voluntary statement to the FBI from being presented against her, but also to ensure she could cross-examine him to get him to verify that she had no corrupt plan to disrupt the vote count.

Ms. Cudd will seek Mr. Rosa’s exculpatory testimony to show that there was no advance plan for Ms. Cudd to walk into the Capitol, that Ms. Cudd was not aware they were breaking the law by walking around inside, that Ms. Cudd did not act “corruptly,” that Ms. Cudd did not “picket,” that Ms. Cudd was not “disorderly,” that Ms. Cudd did not have the intent to commit any of the offenses alleged, and, more generally and most importantly, to show that Ms. Cudd did not commit any of the offenses of which she is accused. Mr. Rosa’s testimony would support reasonable doubt for each count of the Indictment. Furthermore, Ms. Cudd would be able to examine Mr. Rosa on redirect, to place any government cross examination into context for the fact finder.

In the government response, they largely recited the same facts shown in the arrest affidavit, then noted that Cudd and Rosa traveled from Midland, TX, stayed at the same hotel, and traveled through the Capitol together.

Cudd and Rosa both live in Midland, Texas, and they knew each other prior to January 6, 2021. They checked into the same hotel in Washington, D.C. on January 5, 2021, and checked out on January 7. On January 6, they went to the U.S. Capitol together.

In her reply, Cudd cited from Rosa’s 302, describing that he did not travel to the riot with anyone, and added more details based on the receipts obtained in discovery to make it clear they had not traveled together.

Contrary to the government’s implication that the two traveled together or planned to be at the Capitol together, Mr. Rosa’s interview with the FBI shows they did not. This is further supported by the hotel receipts, which the government obtained and shared with the defense. The Willard Hotel receipts show that rooms for the two co-defendants were booked on different dates and for different prices. (Ms. Cudd paid $143 more for her stay. If they coordinated, she would have surely chosen to save that money and would not have used Expedia for that booking.) The two stayed on different floors and had dinner separately and at different times, according to meal receipts. These were not the only two Trump supporters staying at the Willard Hotel from January 5-7. A large number of other Trump supporters shared those booking dates at the Willard. And, while the two may have known each other from back home and shared political views, that is not a basis for joinder. The entire crowd of Trump supporters, many of whom stayed at the Willard Hotel, were present at the Capitol. They are not charged together.

After the government had provided some discovery, including the contents of two phones, the government response to a request from Cudd that it identify all the exhibits it would use in its case in chief repeated the same facts laid out in the original arrest affidavit, all focused on January 6 and thereafter. The response also said it was far too early for Cudd to demand a list of exhibits that would be used against her at trial.

Shortly after Cudd’s request to learn precisely which exhibits the government would use at trial, Eliel Rosa entered into a plea agreement with an expiration date of July 29, pleading guilty to 40 USC 5104, the lesser of the two trespassing charges used with January 6 defendants. His statement of offense narrated what he and Cudd saw and heard as they wandered through the Capitol together. Specifically, he described hearing gunshots and seeing a bunch of people banging on doors, possibly the doors to the Speaker’s Lobby.

While inside of the U.S. Capitol, Mr. Rosa heard two gunshots and saw 15 to 20 men banging on assorted doors. These men were wearing “MAGA” gear.

In addition to implicating Cudd in his own trespassing, Rosa also noted that he did not have any evidence as to Cudd’s intent when she entered the Capitol.

Mr. Rosa has reviewed the allegations in the indictment that relate to his codefendant, Jenny Cudd, and admits that the allegations are true, or that he does not have sufficient information to dispute or disprove those allegations set forth the indictment. Specifically, this includes that Mr. Rosa does not have information as to Ms. Cudd’s motive and intent when she entered the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021 or whether Ms. Cudd had the intent to corruptly obstruct, influence, or impede an official proceeding before Congress – to wit: Congress’s Electoral College Certification on that date.

This might be seen as exculpatory for Cudd, precisely the kind of testimony she hoped to elicit from Rosa at any trial. But it also protected Rosa from any implication in whatever intent Cudd did have when she went to the Capitol.

The government’s sentencing memo for Rosa provided more details about the friendship between Rosa and Cudd, which Rosa described to be a recent friendship.

In an interview with the FBI, Mr. Rosa explained his relationship to his co-defendant Jenny Cudd. Mr. Rosa and Ms. Cudd are new friends, who met at an event in November 2020. Mr. Rosa explained that he and his co-defendant Jenny Cudd held similar beliefs. Although the two were not travel companions, they both discussed their plans to travel to Washington, D.C. and stayed in the same hotel in separate rooms.

It also describes how both returned to the Willard after Trump’s speech, and only then did Rosa decide to go to the Capitol (this detail was used against him at his sentencing).

In the afternoon on January 6, 2021, after listening to President Trump’s speech, Mr. Rosa returned to his hotel, however, he decided he would follow others heading toward the Capitol after learning that Vice President Pence was not going to take action. Mr. Rosa met with his friend Ms. Cudd at the hotel and together they marched toward the United States Capitol where he knew the Congressional certification was taking place.

Rosa’s own sentencing memo explains that the gunshot referred to in his statement of offense was probably the fatal shot of Ashli Babbitt, thereby seemingly confirming that he witnessed a bunch of people in MAGA hats banging on a door before Babbitt was shot.

When he got to the Capitol he walked in through an open door and followed the flow of people going through the rotunda and towards the East gate. He heard what he believes to have been the shot that killed Ms. Babitt. After being asked to stand against the wall for a short period of time while officers dealt with that situation, he (and others) were asked to leave out the East door, and he complied immediately.

Rosa’s sentencing memo also makes clear that he posted nothing positive about the riot after he attended it; a photo he posted to Facebook stating, “And we fight,” was posted at 5:22AM that morning.

On Tuesday, Judge McFadden sentenced Rosa to a year of probation, less than the month of home confinement the government requested (I thought I heard McFadden impose more community service than the government had asked for, 100 hours instead of 60, but no reference to community service appears in the docket).

Hours later, the notice that Cudd would plead guilty posted to the docket. Her plea offer was dated September 27, with a deadline of acceptance of October 11, a day earlier (and indeed, the signatures on the plea agreement are dated October 11). Because Cudd pled guilty to the more serious trespassing misdemeanor than Rosa, it meant that language permitting the government to ask for a terrorism enhancement was included as boilerplate in her plea agreement and given Marina Medvin’s complaints at the plea colloquy, nothing Medvin tried to do managed to get it removed.

Cudd’s statement of offense included a detail that may not appear anywhere else. Not only did she admit under oath she knew the vote was going to be certified (something Rosa also attested to), but she admitted under oath that at the the Stop the Steal rallies on January 5, she heard people calling for revolution and then stated that she was “all for it.”

On January 5, 2021, Ms. Cudd stated the following in a video on social media: “a lot of . . . the speakers this evening were calling for a revolution. Now I don’t know what y’all think about a revolution, but I’m all for it. . . . Nobody actually wants war, nobody wants bloodshed, but the government works for us and unfortunately it appears that they have forgotten that, quite a lot. So, if a revolution is what it takes then so be it. Um, I don’t know if that is going to kick off tomorrow or not, we shall see what the powers that be choose to do with their powers and we shall see what it is that happens in Congress tomorrow at our United States Capitol. So, um either way I think that either our side or the other side is going to start a revolution.”

It’s not clear whether Rosa knew of this video or saw it before he stated that he had no evidence about her intent on the day of the riot.

Cudd’s statement of offense admits that she was in the vicinity of the Babbitt shooting (without specifying it as such), but doesn’t describe (as Rosa’s did) being held up while police dealt with the aftermath.

The government produced to the defense evidence that showed that Ms. Cudd and Mr. Rosa continued walking through the Statuary Hall area of the U.S. Capitol, until 2:43 p.m., when they moved toward the House Chamber and connecting hallways; the defense does not dispute this evidence.

Thus, while Cudd’s statement of offense notes that she did not, herself, enter Pelosi’s office, the statement she recorded after the riot stating that, “we did break down the Nancy Pelosi’s office door,” would have taken place after those with Ashli Babbit had done more than $1,000 of damage to the doors to the Speaker’s lobby, something charged against at least three of those present, and something that could carry a terrorist enhancement for those who did the damage.

We did break down the Nancy Pelosi’s office door and somebody stole her gavel and took a picture sitting in the chair flipping off the camera. . . . they had to evacuate it before we charged the Capitol. . . . Fuck yes, I am proud of my actions, I fucking charged the Capitol today with patriots today. Hell yes I am proud of my actions.” Despite Ms. Cudd’s statement, there is no evidence that Ms. Cudd entered Nancy Pelosi’s office and no evidence that Ms. Cudd stole any property from the Capitol.

The next day, January 8, Cudd explained why she used the collective “we” in her statement from the day of the riot, seemingly trying to distance herself from some of the violence yet still describing that “the patriots [collectively] stormed the Capitol” and asserting she would do the same again, even after she was (at least per Rosa’s statement of offense) present in the vicinity of the Babbitt killing.

So if you watch the entire video [referring to her January 6 social media video] and you watch any of my videos you know that the way that I speak is that I always say we. So I say we the patriots, we . . . whatever. I always say we so those things did happen by other people but I was not a part of that. But in reference to it that umm we the patriots stormed the Capitol and some people went into different offices and different things like that . . . . I would do it again in a heartbeat because I did not break any laws.

The new language in Cudd’s statement of offense — describing the speakers calling for revolution — will help DOJ make a case (one they’ve already started to lay out) about the premeditation reflected in those who gave speeches on January 5.

But it also shows that she responded to calls for revolution the day before the riot by endorsing the idea, and then after the riot, she returned to the Willard and bragged she had been present when the revolution was started, ““I was here today on January 6th when the new revolution started at the Capitol.”

50 replies
  1. earlofhuntingdon says:

    Nicely done, again. Thank you. I continue to be amazed at the resources some of these defendants have. The Willard Hotel, one of DC’s oldest, best, and best-located hotels, and one of its most expensive. It’s surroundings are also among the most intensely surveilled on the planet.

    • emptywheel says:

      Cudd is the second best educated Jan6er whose plea I’ve heard, after Graydon Young. It must be a very successful flower business.

      • Rugger9 says:

        Or, it’s being bankrolled with dark money. Maybe the Pandora Papers will have more, or perhaps the “Epik Fail” breach. We do know that such arrangements are typically done quietly (like AT&T’s propping up of OANN and the antics of the Mercers) to try to limit the blowback hitting the sugar daddies.

        As Mr. Felt said, follow the money….

        I suppose staying at the Trump Hotel would have been too obvious.

        • Mojo Risin' says:

          History rhymes a bit too well, Fritz Thyssen then is Peter Thiel now. Same thing, guys that think they’re smart enough to ride the global mafia/fascism tiger. Thinking they’re untouchable, and can only be made ten times richer by the new militarism and the associated contracts… these typologies occur like water seeking sea level in immature and undeveloped cultures.

      • Leoghann says:

        I don’t have any idea of Ms. Cudd’s education. But she has lived in Midland, Texas for nearly all of her life, and has been in business there for at least six years. Midland is the consummate oil boom town, and the oilfield there has been booming almost continuously there since 2002. It has the second-highest per capita income in the US. People there favor Midland natives when it comes to doing business and spending their considerable resources. And between her family name and the fact that she is “from there,” there is a likelihood that her immediate family has considerable resources as well.

        tl;dr: She’s rich, and could easily afford the Willard Hotel, as well as her documented travels around the country to be a MAGA protester.

    • Mojo Risin' says:

      Our sleepwalking establishment didn’t really notice that Lesin was murdered and the Mayflower treason-fest happened within six months of each other in the exact same physical and social space you reference. To make a point, that US CI was a joke and the world knew it. This point was missed by self-absorbed narcissist Americans, that is, all of us.

      • P J Evans says:

        If you’re going to drop stuff like that here, you should provide citations to back your assertions.

        • Mojo Risin’ says:

          Citations? You want me to tell you which one of Comey’s empty suits took a bribe to forget to babysit?

          • bmaz says:

            Yes. And back the fuck off from spamming our threads relentlessly. That will probably be your last advisory.

    • harpie says:

      I wonder how many took advantage of the “Women for America First” group discount like Daniel Egtvedt did, as Marcy noted in April:
      3:00 AM · Apr 3, 2021

      Daniel Egdtvedt, accused of serially assaulting several police as they were trying to get him out of the Capitol, cited Women for America First as his “company” to get their group discount at the Willard. Ties them to one of the more violent assailants.

      [This is how his name is spelled: Egtvedt, Daniel Dean]

  2. The Old Redneck says:

    If you just wanted to be a snark, you’d say these people better be thankful that stupidity is not a crime. They didn’t just commit crimes; they left a paper trail showing intent and other things the government can use to hit them harder.
    Still, I remain troubled by the fact that Cudd and others were manipulated by Trump, Roger Stone, and others who knew better. Cudd has a terrorism enhancement hanging over her head like the Sword of Damocles. Meanwhile, nothing has happened to the people pulling the puppet strings.

    • Zirc says:

      The paper trail would have been meaningless to them because they thought they were going to succeed.


      • Mojo Risin' says:

        The difference between the Willard/Eastman/Stone/Ali 1/5ers and other coup plotters in history is that the Willardites were properly confident that they could push as close to literally stringing up Pence as possible with no real consequences at the top planning level. Why? Because a SCOTUS justice’s wife was at the top, and she had the tacit support of the entire GOP in her schemes. And she wasn’t wrong in that assumption, she’ll never face questions. It was the most low-risk coup in history, because they already controlled the judiciary, and, obviously, still do.

      • Raven Eye says:

        Probably thinking that all that information would be something historians would be combing through…Rather than prosecutors.

        • ducktree says:

          “Ignorance, Mr. Worthing, is like an exotic fruit. Touch it, and the bloom is gone.” Lady Bracknell, The Importance of Being Ernest.

          Apparently, the fruit also makes an intoxicating brandy of which Ms. Cudd has drunk deeply.

  3. OldTulsaDude says:

    This series of articles has helped me understand the Trump supporters. They each seem to be a version of Harvey Updyke, Jr., the rabid and criminal Alabama football fan who plotted, planned, staked out, and then poisoned two famous oak trees at Toomer’s Corner at Auburn University because he wanted Auburn fans to hate him as much as he hated them.

    And that explains the Trump supporters. There is no great underlying dogma. They’re just pissed they lost the game.

  4. russell penner says:

    Young or old, rich or poor, educated or ignorant, people in love do crazy, self destructive things. These people are totally enamored with all things trumpian. After carefully excising their beloved 2nd amendment,( the only section they understand ),they would happily run the original Constitution through a shredder to keep their beloved FG in office for life. And his children following. I work around this type every day.

    • subtropolis says:

      McCabe was fired by the so-called president. This had nothing to do with the DoJ giving in to political abuse.

      • earlofhuntingdon says:

        Really? You’re collapsing too many things, including who employed him. Not to mention that deputy Directors of the FBI normally receive more support from both their director and the DoJ to which the FBI reports. I don’t recall much push back from either.

        Under this settlement – by the DoJ – it agreed to treat McCabe’s forced removal as void and to reinstate him such that he is deemed to have retired normally, with full pay and benefits accruing to a member of the Senior Executive Service. Among other things, it paid his attorneys’ fees.

        The usual waivers and “nothing herein shall be construed as an admission,” notwithstanding, McCabe won, which means the DoJ acted wrongly in dismissing him with such intentional and humiliating fanfare to placate a grossly abusive president. Just one of the gazillion costs to the United States arising out of the maladministration of the former guy.

          • bmaz says:

            That is simply not correct. McCabe did not work for Trump, he worked for DOJ. Trump may have put it in morion, and he did, but the order was carried out by DOJ.

          • Kenster42 says:

            Uh, yeah, dude, you’re being willfully blind here to fit a political agenda. A couple of points:

            1. McCabe’s resolution is a 100%, complete, total win for him and a 100% complete, total capitulation by the Federal Government.
            2. The DOJ (yes with Trump egging them on, but there are plenty of examples of DOJ pushing back on Trump) enthusiastically went after McCabe for alleged lying about the Russia situation. It took Judge Reggie Walton to finally tell DOJ to put up or shut up on the investigation against McCabe. When prosecutors finally took it to a grand jury they declined to return an indictment.

            All to say, the DOJ was smart to settle this, because if the case went to trial many, many DOJ and other related political stakeholders would have had seen a lot of very embarrassing disclosures that would have shown how truly awful they treated McCabe for purely political reasons.

            Yes, Trump is a horrible, bad actor in all of this etc. etc. ad infinitum, ad nauseam, but he didn’t make this happen.

          • Leoghann says:

            Actually, no, it wasn’t Trump. It was the craven, half-pint klansman, Jeff Sessions. Merrick Garland’s very own Former Guy. (FG1)

      • WilliamOckham says:

        He made them send him the cuff links! Which, I hope, are going to be the premier item at some high dollar charity auction some day.

    • Mojo Risin’ says:

      The difference between the GOP now and NSDAP then is that they didn’t want a Brazil passport until a decade after taking full power, while Thiel already owns his New Zealand papers. There isn’t a single one of them that wouldn’t run to Dubai or Auckland, while some Nazis were true believers.

  5. obsessed says:

    It’s kind of unsettling that there are so many glaring grammatical errors with regard to mismatched plural subjects and singular verbs, e.g., “Jenny Louise Cudd and Eliel Rosa are subsequently observed walking past the staircase and is further observed walking past the Upper House Door”. I expect that kind of sloppiness from Team Trump, and I understand how overworked the system is, but it happens 3 times just in that first bulleted list. I guess they started with a complaint about one defendant and cut and pasted to make it refer to two, failing to change the verbs. There’s also some very unprofessional use of commas. I’d expect better proof-reading for a style of writing that’s known for its precision and “fine print”.

    On a less annoyingly irrelevant topic, does anyone have any thoughts about whether Congress will, or should, use “inherent contempt” to arrest and imprison Bannon without having to wait in the hope that Merrick Garland suddenly grows a spine? I know he’s often defended here, but I’m to the point that just seeing a still photo of his face makes my blood boil. He makes me as angry as Louis DeJoy and Devin Nunes. In terms of people who are supposed to be on the side of justice this much I haven’t viscerally hated anyone this much since Max Baucus in 2009. Who would y’all emptywheelers have appointed the AG if given that opportunity?

    • subtropolis says:

      That you’d admit to lumping Garland in with DeJoy and Nunes was a tip-off that what followed would be fucking nonsense. It’s not up to the AG to make that decision unilaterally. Let’s see whether the committee even votes to refer Bannon before we render our undergarments.

      • obsessed says:

        As per Elie Mystal, Congress has the power of inherent contempt, last successfully used in 1927, and usable without any participation by the DOJ. If you consider that nonsense how do you explain 1927? And the fact that Garland offends me as much as Nunes (if for different reasons) is just that: a fact. Garland makes me sick to my stomach. That’s not nonsense – it’s a gut-level reaction. All you have to do is read the next post about DOJ burying the damning details of the McCabe case. Every day another crime against democracy on Garland’s impotent watch.

  6. harpie says:

    Here are the Parler VIDEOs I could find that are labeled “Near the Capitol” AND [I think] are all on the EAST SIDE within the timeframe of 1:57 PM to 2:39 PM.
    [NOTE: ADD https:// to the beginning of each link]

    1:57 PM NE Barricades are breached

    1:57 PM Near the Capitol [EAST SIDE]
    1:59 PM Near the Capitol [EAST SIDE]
    1:59 PM Near the Capitol [EAST SIDE]

    2:00 PM Mob reaches police line at the Central East Steps

    2:00 PM Near the Capitol [EAST SIDE]
    2:01 PM Near the Capitol [EAST SIDE]

    2:06 PM Central East Steps breached

    2:06 PM Near the Capitol [EAST SIDE]
    2:08 PM Near the Capitol [EAST SIDE]
    2:08 PM Near the Capitol [EAST SIDE]
    2:11 PM Near the Capitol [EAST SIDE]

    2:25 PM Partial breach of Central East Doors
    2:39 PM Central East Doors fully breached

Comments are closed.