FACT CHECK: EVIDENCE of FBI COLLUSION with the SEDITIONISTS of JAN 6th

Author: oromagi

Posts

Total: 18
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,689
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
FACT CHECK: CLAIMS of FBI ROLE in JAN. 6 ATTACK are FALSE
McKenzie Sadeghi
USA TODAY

The claim: FBI operatives organized the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol
In the months following the deadly Jan. 6 attack on the United States Capitol by rioters seeking to overturn the 2020 presidential election results, conservative media personalities have attempted to downplay the insurrection and shift blame.

Some baselessly claimed the mob of Donald Trump supporters who breached Capitol barricades — fueled by unproven allegations of voter fraud — was actually a crowd of antifa members in disguise. Those allegations were wrong.

Now, claims that undercover FBI agents were behind the Capitol insurrection are circulating on social media.

"Evidence surfaces that the FBI planned and executed January 6 Capitol riot," the Tatum Report wrote in a June 17 Instagram post.

The narrative started with a June 14 report by conservative website Revolver News. The story says there's a "strong possibility" the federal government had "undercover agents or confidential informants embedded within the so-called militia groups" that were seeking to obstruct the Senate certification of the 2020 election results. The Instagram post linked to a Tatum report post that recapped the Revolver News story. USA TODAY reached out to Tatum Report for comment

After the article was published, Fox News host Tucker Carlson, Republican lawmakers and social media users amplified it across platforms.

Facebook users have shared an open letter from Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., in which he demands FBI Director Christopher Wray "fully disclose the role and involvement of FBI operatives during the January 6th Capitol riot." Other users shared a clip of Carlson's June 15 show, during which he said "FBI operatives were organizing the attack on the Capitol on January 6."

But that theory relies on a false assumption: that anyone identified as an "unindicted co-conspirator" in charging documents is a government agent.

In fact, legal experts say that term cannot be used to describe FBI agents or undercover government operatives. Charging documents and other evidence indicate that the Jan. 6 rioters included Trump supporters, conspiracy theorists and members of far-right groups.

Fox News and social media users who amplified Revolver News' claims did not return requests for comment.

Unindicted co-conspirators, explained
The term "unindicted co-conspirators" refers to people who allegedly took part in the same offense in some fashion but are not being criminally charged for their role, Ira Robbins, an American University law professor, wrote in a 2004 paper that represents the legal consensus on the term.

This can include someone who cooperated with law enforcement to receive a deal or who authorities don't feel they have sufficient evidence to charge.

The term became well-known in 1974, when a grand jury applied it to President Richard Nixon during the Watergate scandal.

The Justice Department's policy says federal prosecutors should not name unindicted co-conspirators "in the absence of some significant justification."

Government informants can't be described as co-conspirators

The primary evidence presented in the Revolver News story — federal charging documents related to the Jan. 6 insurrection — don't support its claim about FBI informants organizing the riot.

Revolver News is run by former Trump speechwriter Darren Beattie, who was fired in 2018 for his appearance at a conference featuring white nationalists. It's unclear who wrote the site's June 14 report, as it doesn't have a byline.

The story argues that because upward of 20 unindicted co-conspirators listed in federal charging documents haven't been charged, there is a "disturbing possibility" that they could be undercover FBI agents or federal informants.

That's not actually a possibility, legal experts say.

"Prosecutors would not name FBI agents as unindicted co-conspirators," Robbins told USA TODAY via email. "Tucker Carlson’s allegation that the FBI organized the attack on the Capitol is pure fantasy."

Robbins said while it is possible FBI agents were acting undercover in extremist organizations involved in the Capitol riot, that "would not necessarily mean they had instigated the insurrection."

Similarly, Cornell Law School professor Jens David Ohlin told the Washington Post there are "many reasons why an indictment would reference unindicted co-conspirators, but their status as FBI agents is not one of them." In a 1985 ruling, the  U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit  noted that "government agents and informers cannot be conspirators."

The FBI declined to comment for this fact check.

No evidence unnamed individuals in Caldwell case are FBI agents
The Revolver News article singles out unnamed individuals mentioned in a case involving Thomas Caldwell of Virginia, an alleged Oath Keepers member who is facing charges related to the Capitol attack.

In an emailed statement to USA TODAY, Beattie said the issue from "our perspective is not the specific phrase 'unindicted co-conspirator'" but that "the individuals referenced in the 1/6 charging documents (referred to variously as Persons or individuals), remain unindicted on account of a prior relationship with federal law enforcement."

But there's no evidence those unnamed individuals, referred to as "persons" in court filings, are federal agents — and ample evidence they are people close to Caldwell.

Charging documents identify the leader of the Oath Keepers, a far-right militia group, as "PERSON ONE." (That person is Stewart Rhodes, and there is no evidence he is an undercover government agent.)

"PERSON TWO" is also not a secret government agent, as the Revolver News article suggests. Charging documents indicate Caldwell stayed with "PERSON TWO" at an Arlington hotel and took "selfie" photographs with them on the perimeter of the Capitol.

A criminal affidavit against Caldwell and Oath Keepers members Donovan Crowl and Jessica Watkins says Caldwell stayed at the hotel with his wife, Sharon, who has not been charged with a crime.

Further, a defense filing from May 26 says Caldwell "rarely travels without his wife" due to "physical limitations and health concerns." Caldwell also shared on Facebook photos of he and his wife at the Capitol on Jan. 6, according to the Washington Post.

The Revolver News story compares the Capitol attack to the October 2020 plot to kidnap Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, which involved undercover federal agents. But The New York Times noted operatives involved in that case were referred to in the criminal complaint as "confidential human sources" and "undercover employees," not "unindicted co-conspirators."

Beattie did not present any additional evidence to support the Revolver News article when he appeared as a guest on Carlson's show.

Rioters included Trump supporters, far-right groups
While authorities are still investigating who organized and led the insurrection, court documents and other available evidence show the rioters are linked to far-right extremist groups, including the Proud Boys, the Oath Keepers and the Three Percenters.

QAnon followers and extremists talked on online forums about a siege of the Capitol as early as December, NBC News reported. Experts told USA TODAY the Capitol attack was the result of years of conspiracy theories and misinformation.

A USA TODAY review of charging documents found nearly all conspiracy charges are against members of the Proud Boys or the Oath Keepers, or people who acted with them. Several of the alleged conspirators attended or scheduled paramilitary training and recruited others to their cause.

Similarly, a review by the Associated Press of public records associated with more than 120 people at the insurrection found rioters included supporters of the baseless QAnon conspiracy theory, Trump supporters, far-right militants and white supremacists. A ProPublica collection of more than 500 videos from Jan. 6 shows rioters wearing Trump apparel, QAnon symbols and Confederate flags.

As of June 23, more than 400 arrests had been made in connection with the insurrection, none of which included charges against an FBI agent. Testimony from rioters who stormed the Capitol said they felt called to Washington by Trump and his false claim that the election was stolen, according to the Washington Post.

"This was not simply a march. This was an incredible attack on our institutions of government," Jason McCullough, an assistant U.S. attorney, said during a March hearing.

Our rating: False
The claim that the FBI orchestrated the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol is FALSE, based on our research. There is no evidence that "unindicted co-conspirators" mentioned in charging documents are undercover FBI agents. Legal experts say undercover government operatives and informants cannot be named in government filings as unindicted co-conspirators. The best available evidence identifies the rioters as Trump supporters, conspiracy theorists and members of far-right groups.












SkepticalOne
SkepticalOne's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 1,720
3
3
7
SkepticalOne's avatar
SkepticalOne
3
3
7
-->
@oromagi
I'm shocked...I really thought THIS conspiracy theory was gonna be the one to relieve Trump of accountability for inciting an insurrection. 


Oh well. 
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
-->
@oromagi
would you like to debate whether undercover officers were in the crowd? A live debate?
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,294
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@Wylted
would you like to debate whether undercover officers were in the crowd? A live debate?
I would. Discord?
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
I would. Discord?

Lol it's wierd you actually want to argue not a single undercover law enforcement person was in the crowd LOL. I currently am puking my brains out with covid but yes be on discord at midnight and we'll discuss if undercover officers ever patrol  protests crowds that have potential for violence
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,294
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@Wylted
The claim addressed by the OP of this thread is the claim that government agents organized or colluded with others to organize the January 6 attacks. I am not aware of any evidence that this claim is correct. If you think it is then we can discuss it live on Discord as you suggest but not tonight, I will be at work. How does Friday or Saturday work for you?
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
My claim was that there were undercover in the crowd. 

Once we establish that undercover are in protest crowds, than we can begin the discussion on whether they are agent provocateur or not. 

Are you now conceding that undercovers were in the crowd?
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,294
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@Wylted
Are you now conceding that undercovers were in the crowd?
Not conceding or denying that point because I haven't looked into it and prefer to base my claims on evidence over presupposition, though if I had to guess I would say it is not too unlikely. Several of the groups involved in the riot were extremist groups that the government would have an obvious interest in trying to have informants in well before the January 6 attacks, the Oath Keepers and Proud Boys being two such groups that come to mind right away.

That's not really the claim addressed by the OP though, is it?
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
it's a step by step process. I am not talking about undercovers infiltrating right wing groups. I am talking about ones there strictly for relaying intel from inside the waves of people and ones meant to quickly and discreetly grap people they find problematic. Like they see somebody being violent.  It is easier for non uniformed people to quickly grab them and drag them to uniformed officers than it is for uniforms to know what is going on and come in and stop them. 

Let me ask you this. Do you know what a reverse sting is?

It's not the same as a sting. A maybe setting up a bike, and seeing if it will get stolen. A reverse sting is one where agents will encourage somebody they consider likely to steal the bike into stealing it. They pressure them and try to influence them to steal the bike . "Come on man, just do it"

When dealing with extremist groups, whether they be right wing or Islamic or left wing, the favorite tactic of agents is a reverse sting. When you see in the news that somebody was arrested trying to buy nukes, this is usually a reverse sting situation. It is usually some Muslim who would have never even have considered buying a nuke, but the government did a few things. They made it actually look like buying one is possible, if the target was maybe thinking it would be better to not commit terrorism than the agent might say "do not be a pussy man, don't you love allah?" And other techniques to change their mind. 

Do you see where I am going with the reverse sting thing? 

We have agents deeply undercover in many extremist organizations. The are all gathered in one place and a perceived threat by idiots who make threat assessments.  How can we take out 800 at once? Maybe by planting a little bug in their head that storming the capital is a good ideal. Maybe the agents didn't realize that the storming would be successful.  We can't really know what happens.

So we have the possible reverse sting angle. We have people not doing reverse stings but undercover patrolling the crowd. This is actually common in all protests, but it should be illegal. 

You might ask why should patrolling a protest crowd in plain clothes should be illegal, especially when it is really effective at keeping the crowd safe.

It's because in America we value freedom. If there is even a 1/5000 chance that undercover cops could act as agent provocateur s , than we shouldn't allow any in the crowd. I'd say the chance is even higher than 1 in 5000, given the evil nature of government as proven by the fact that reverse stings even exist and that being a provocateur is really just a type of reverse sting but on a whole crowd as opposed to on individuals. 

My question to you disc is this. Why do you blindly trust government?

You know you would have been one of those people in Nazi Germany that were just like "The reichstag fire was legit bro, look at all these German institutions that agree, no way would our government ever do domestic terrorism ". It's just a dumb way to think.

Anytime you are like "just trust the government and official institutions like they did in Nazi Germany" than you should really start to think about whether you are supporting the good guys or the bad guys. 
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,198
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@oromagi
Our rating: False
The claim that the FBI orchestrated the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol is FALSE, based on our research.

Next non-sense we will hear form nutty side-ed trumpeteers is that Trumpet was a FBI plant from day one of his presidency and that he was planted there to root out the evil democrats.

This could be a new twist  on the old "Manchuring Candidate" scenario.

Talk about crazy conspiracies, that would be a real zinger for sure.



Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,294
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@Wylted
We have agents deeply undercover in many extremist organizations. The are all gathered in one place and a perceived threat by idiots who make threat assessments.  How can we take out 800 at once? Maybe by planting a little bug in their head that storming the capital is a good ideal. Maybe the agents didn't realize that the storming would be successful.  We can't really know what happens.

So we have the possible reverse sting angle.
Right, I understand the hypothesis being laid out. It really is an incredibly simple concept. If you are willing to commit to claiming that you think this is what happened then we can talk about it, I ask again whether Friday or Saturday is good for you.
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
Why are you back tracking from what you agreed to in post number 4?
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,294
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@Wylted
I am not a coward so I am able to say my opinion directly, in this case that I think the claim addressed in the OP is incorrect.


Speaking of which... do you think the claim addressed in the OP is correct or incorrect?
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,689
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Wylted
-->@oromagi
would you like to debate whether undercover officers were in the crowd? A live debate?
There's a wide gap of difference between FBI collusion with the Seditionists (as havoc claimed the other day, prompting this post) and FBI undercover "in the crowd."

There is also a wide gap of difference between FBI undercovers "in the crowd" and FBI undercovers "in the Capitol."  

  • The FBI is an inherently conservative organization by nature.  I know from personal experience that the GOP has been actively recruiting and encouraging loyal Republicans for jobs in the FBI for at least twenty years, probably since its founding.  I am 100% confident that there were some to many FBI agents who attended the "Stop the Steal" Rally  out of purely political conviction.  
  • I would not be at all surprised to learn that there were some agents attending the rally in some undercover capacity- monitoring and gathering intel on the multiple terrorist orgs openly attending the rally.
  • I know for certain that there were many FBI informants in the crowd.  That is the FBI's  m.o., bribing or plea bargaining cooperation within the leadership ranks of many radicalized organizations.  We only get bits and pieces of present activity but we can study FBI tactics in the 50's-70's pretty thoroughly now and can see how the FBI had placements everywhere.
But Trumpism is not Conservatism and assaulting the seat of government is not attending a rally.

  • If any active FBI agents entered the Capitol on their own accord or undercover, we will certainly learn this. Better than 15% of all seditionists indicted so far are active members of the military or law enforcement so I would not be too surprised to hear of an active FBI agent in the Capitol.  However, the FBI has had a lot of time with the evidence and I assume the faces of everybody who entered the Capitol, if not every identity and the FBI is well motivated to out any direct connections with the seditionists early on, before such a claim arises in court.  
  • I know of at least 3 individuals who are reported to be FBI informants and entered the Capitol on Jan 6th.  I know BLM considers John Sullivan, the guy who filmed Ashli Babbit's death, a police informant based on his conduct during riots in Portland.
So, 

FBI informants in the crowd of 20-30,000 at the rally? Definitely.
FBI informants in the crowd of < 10,000 outside the Capitol?  Definitely.
FBI informants in the crowd of ~1500 that broke into the Capitol and attacked Federal police officers?  Definitely.

FBI agents in the crowd at the rally?  Definitely.
FBI agents in the crowd outside the Capitol?  Probably.
FBI agents in the crowd that broke into the Capitol and attacked Federal police officers?  Possibly but far less likely and rapidly diminishing in likelihood as court cases proceed with no such claim by the FBI.





oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,689
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
All that said, even if some active FBI agents are discovered to have been a part of the storming of the Capitol, I don't see that as evidence that the FBI was actively colluding with the Trump Administration to overturn the election results and install Trump as an unconstitutional leader.  Whatever the degree of Trump support within the FBI rank and file, I am convinced that FBI leadership mostly considers Trump an agent of Putin and other organized crime organizations.
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,294
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@oromagi
All that said, even if some active FBI agents are discovered to have been a part of the storming of the Capitol, I don't see that as evidence that the FBI was actively colluding with the Trump Administration to overturn the election results and install Trump as an unconstitutional leader.  Whatever the degree of Trump support within the FBI rank and file, I am convinced that FBI leadership mostly considers Trump an agent of Putin and other organized crime organizations.
Given the tendency of Trump supporters to downplay/whitewash the events of Jan. 6 and in more extreme cases claim even to this day that said events were a good thing, I doubt that the above is the conclusion that the people making the claims of FBI involvement are driving at. More likely something along the lines of "The people there didn't want to do such things but the FBI covertly made them do it to make Trump look bad or give them an excuse to arrest Trump supporters", or some such silliness like that.

8 days later

sadolite
sadolite's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,838
3
2
4
sadolite's avatar
sadolite
3
2
4
All anyone knows about Washington DC is what you are told to think or what you want to believe. There are no credible sources for news or facts. Your source sucks his source suck everyone's source sucks so they all suck. You cant even prove a source is credible. Whatever, you are all going to die. I have work to do. That's my source for news and information.

18 days later

Mharman
Mharman's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 4,090
3
6
9
Mharman's avatar
Mharman
3
6
9
This conspiracy theory, true or not is irrelevant. "Peacefully and patriotically" isn't a dog whistle. Period.