Prosecutors on Monday presented opening arguments in a second trial against members of the far-right Oath Keepers militia group accused of joining a monthslong plot to keep Joe Biden out of the White House, as the defense opened its own case saying the men have been “overcharged” and had no real plan.But in this case, brought against Oath Keepers Roberto Minuta, Joseph Hackett, David Moerschel and Edward Vallejo, federal prosecutors will likely have to adjust their arguments to explain how the four men, none of whom are alleged to be leaders of the militia, helped to orchestrate the violent plot.While prosecutors focused on lofty constitutional arguments, the Insurrection Act and the Electoral College vote in the first trial, Edwards instead emphasized that these defendants were focused on using “brute force” to keep Trump in power.Edwards also preemptively struck at defense arguments that the Oath Keepers went into the Capitol to help law enforcement, telling the jury officers would testify that “none of these defendants helped them, they only presented a danger.” Minuta, Moerschel, Hackett and Vallejo “perverted the Constitutional order” and “were willing to use force to push their view of the Constitution, their view of America on the country,” Edwards said, telling the jury that each defendant, at the end of the trail, should be found guilty of several charges, including seditious conspiracy.Ultimately, Weinberg told jurors, they will see that prosecutors “overpromised and underdelivered” in their accusations against the Oath Keepers, which he described as people who were “out of shape, overweight, elderly, and really just wanted to play military.” “I think Drake said it best,” Weinberg said, referencing the rapper: “These gentlemen had Twitter fingers, not trigger fingers.” This story has been updated with"