Stop the Steal Fanatic Is Flirting With Ticket Back to Jail

On Nov. 5, 2020, two men arrived outside the Philadelphia Convention Center by way of a silver Hummer displaying a QAnon sticker. Inside the building, ballots from the recently concluded election were being counted, and would soon affirm Joe Biden’s victory in the state and the Electoral College. But police said the two men, who drove from Virginia, were spotted nearby, and had pistols on them. A spokesman for a pro-Trump group one of them belonged to told a local newspaper they went there “to see if they could be of any assistance and scope out what’s happening.” Neither had a permit to carry in Pennsylvania, and they were arrested that day.

Months later, the duo were both briefly back in custody after prosecutors said they had been on the grounds of the U.S. Capitol on the day of the Jan. 6 riot; neither was accused of entering the building. Prosecutors in Philadelphia tried to revoke their bail, but a judge rejected the request, instead imposing new bail conditions, including that they not “participate in any social-media activity,” or attend political rallies.

Now it appears that one of those men, 43-year-old Joshua Macias, may have broken those bail conditions, experts said, raising the possibility he will be back behind bars while he awaits trial.

As of this writing, Macias faces multiple firearms charges, as well as charges related to the election, which prosecutors say he sought to interfere with. (The firearms charges were initially dismissed by a lower court judge, but the Philadelphia District Attorney’s office was able to get the charges refiled.) Macias has not yet issued a formal plea but has maintained his innocence, with his attorney suggesting his activism amounted to “puffery without the action.” Macias did not respond to requests for comment, and his attorney declined to comment for this story.

Meanwhile, evidence compiled via open-source research by Kristofer Goldsmith, an Innovation Lab Senior Fellow at advocacy group Human Rights First, shows that Macias has recently been on social media. The activity in question runs the gamut, from a seemingly banal promo vid for hormone treatment to a meager attempt by a social-media account using his name to organize a “Freedom Convoy,” a possible reference to some kind of U.S. sequel to right-wing trucker protests in Canada.

In December 2021, nearly a year after he was ordered not to use social media, Macias appeared in a podcast live-streamed on social media. On Feb. 1, 2022, Macias appeared in a live-stream video posted on Facebook by a salon in Houston in which he discussed hormone treatment. Most recently, an account bearing Macias’ name and date of birth has been posting about a “freedom convoy” on a social media site developed by Veterans for America First, an organization that amounts to a rebranding of Veterans for Trump, a group Macias was involved with before the 2020 election.

Around the time The Daily Beast reached out to a Twitter account linked to Veterans for America First for comment this past week, the “Joshua Macias” social-media account on the organization’s website was updated. Among other changes, its profile included a new handle suggesting it was a “fan” account for Macias. An owner of the Twitter account in question also told The Daily Beast, of Macias: “He did not attend any rally & has maintained [sic] so the past 12 months the exact guidelines that was given to Him at the detriment of our organization support to help veterans.”

The Twitter user added, “Others can record and speak about him it’s still America! Check Your open source details as that is a fan account on our website.”

Sandra Mayson, a legal scholar at the University of Pennsylvania who focuses on the role of preventative restraint in the criminal legal system, reviewed the evidence compiled by Goldsmith about Macias. “It certainly seems like he’s violating the conditions of his release,” Mayson told The Daily Beast.

But whether that will result in bail revocation is an open question.

“In general, judges have tremendous discretion both in setting conditions of pretrial release and determining when there has been a violation of those conditions that warrants revocation of release,” she added. “The question of whether the court will find Macias to be in violation of its order is less a question of law than a question of how the judge will construe the evidence. Even if the judge thinks that Macias is violating the conditions of release, a judge typically has discretion to revoke bail or not as she sees fit.”

Her assessment was echoed by Robert Weisberg, a legal scholar at Stanford University. “It’s not exactly ambiguous, is it?” Weisberg said. “He obviously violated the bail conditions, and it would be bogus for him to argue this violation would intrude on his First or Second Amendment rights. He doesn’t have those in the context of this bail order.”

When reached for comment, a spokesperson for the Philadelphia District Attorney’s office shared the following statement:

“The Philadelphia District Attorney’s Election Task Force regularly receives tips from members of the public regarding this defendant and other individuals who may have attempted to criminally interfere with the 2020 election, including by participating in the deadly January 6, 2021, insurrection at the U.S. Capitol, as well as ongoing efforts to undermine American democracy”

“The Philadelphia DAO Election Task Force is aware of recent activity involving defendant Joshua Macias,” they added.

Goldsmith believes that Macias’ alleged initial offense and potential bail violation are both concerning in light of sustained extremism among some in the veterans community, to which he himself belongs.

“The activity that we’re seeing here is a clear example of how there’s a growing disregard for the norms of democracy in this far-right movement,” he told The Daily Beast. “When people decide that only one party, or worse, one person represents legitimate government, they’re essentially trying to tear up our Constitution and replace it with an autocracy. I swore the same oath that these people did. The difference is that I intend to keep it.”