The Federal Bureau of Investigation has been outed in a New York Times piece for having undercover agents working the Capitol riot on January 6. Furthermore, the FBI agent was collaborating with a Proud Boys informant who confirmed there was no centralized plot to overturn the 2020 election results on Donald Trump’s behalf. As has been oft-repeated, the pro-Trump attendees were not part of any ‘pre-planned attack’:
As scores of Proud Boys made their way, chanting and shouting, toward the Capitol on Jan. 6, one member of the far-right group was busy texting a real-time account of the march.
The recipient was his F.B.I. handler.
In the middle of an unfolding melee that shook a pillar of American democracy — the peaceful transfer of power — the bureau had an informant in the crowd, providing an inside glimpse of the action, according to confidential records obtained by The New York Times. In the informant’s version of events, the Proud Boys, famous for their street fights, were largely following a pro-Trump mob consumed by a herd mentality rather than carrying out any type of preplanned attack.
The NY Times piece corroborates what was only recently labeled a “far-right conspiracy theory”: The FBI had undercover agents working the January 6 faux-insurrection who essentially did nothing to stop extremist groups from turning the Electoral College into an utterly chaotic mess. The Times provides details of how the FBI agent was working one extremist group during the developing Capitol riot:
After meeting his fellow Proud Boys at the Washington Monument that morning, the informant described his path to the Capitol grounds where he saw barriers knocked down and Trump supporters streaming into the building, the records show. At one point, his handler appeared not to grasp that the building had been breached, the records show, and asked the informant to keep him in the loop — especially if there was any violence…
But the records, and information from two people familiar with the matter, suggest that federal law enforcement had a far greater visibility into the assault on the Capitol, even as it was taking place, than was previously known.
At the same time, the new information is likely to complicate the government’s efforts to prove the high-profile conspiracy charges it has brought against several members of the Proud Boys.
The Times underscores that the FBI had far more advance and real-time knowledge of the developing riot than previously admitted; this came amidst highly questionable and suspect decisions handed down from the highest levels of the government to limit the National Guard presence due to purported concerns about “optics” and to limit the capability of Capitol Police to adequately respond. The Times report once again shows that there was no “preset plot” among one of the most high-visibility extremist groups to disrupt the Electoral College certification proceedings.
On Jan. 6, and for months after, the records show, the informant, who was affiliated with a Midwest chapter of the Proud Boys, denied that the group intended to use violence that day. In lengthy interviews, the records say, he also denied that the extremist organization planned in advance to storm the Capitol. The informant’s identity was not disclosed in the records.
The records describing the informant’s account of Jan. 6 — excerpts from his interviews and communications with the F.B.I. before, during and after the riot — dovetail with assertions made by defense lawyers who have argued that even though several Proud Boys broke into the Capitol, the group did not arrive in Washington with a preset plot to storm the building.
They also raise new questions about the performance of the F.B.I. in tracking the threat from far-right groups like the Proud Boys.
In June, Fox News host Tucker Carlson took a significant amount of heat from the mainstream media for highlighting a Revolver News piece that attempted to shine a spotlight on the FBI’s suspicious activities prior to and during the January 6 riot.
Tucker Carlson had on the editor of Revolver News, Darren Beattie, who fleshed out the story. The news media, predictably, losts its mind over daring to question the official narrative of the January 6th insurrection. Tucker addressed the hyperbolic blowback in ‘classic Tucker’ fashion.
“Well, there’s been an enormous amount of hyper-ventilating in Washington over a segment we did two nights ago in which we pointed out that there were pretty clearly a number of people in the crowd at the Capitol on January 6th who had been in previous contact with the FBI about what was going to happen that day,” Tucker said in his monologue.
“Some of them may have encouraged others at the scene to commit crimes,” he went on. “Now, if that happened, and we believe it did happen, it would not be out of character for the FBI. They have done things very much like that before. That is beyond dispute.”
“But in this case, they are disputing it,” Tucker continued. “Not the FBI directly — they haven’t said a word. But the obedient minions of the national security state who run the social media accounts for the NY Times and occupy the anchor desks at CNN, they became hysterical when we mentioned it.”
“‘You can’t say that!’ they screamed, ‘That’s not allowed!’” Tucker mocked.
Not only is the New York Times ‘saying that,’ they are writing entire pieces that show Tucker was right.
Tucker then asked the following three questions:
- “How many of the so-called insurrectionists on January 6 had a relationship with the FBI? How many of these FBI moles encouraged others that day to break the law at the Capitol?”
- “If the Justice Department knew there were going to be protestors massing at the Capitol that day, and it’s clear they did know, then why didn’t they do anything to stop the riot? Why did police at the Capitol allow protestors to walk in, as video shows that they did?”
- “Why can’t we see the tape for ourselves? The government is hiding more than 14,000 hours of video surveillance tape that shows exactly what did happen at the Capitol that day? Why are they hiding that? And why aren’t news organizations demanding to see it?”
If the answer to the first question is “none,” Tucker said, they would admit they were wrong and apologize. “But if the answer is not ‘none,’ and we’re pretty sure it isn’t ‘none,’ then people who claim otherwise are liars and hacks, and should leave the public state immediately because they have betrayed their readers and viewers.” he added. Tucker said usch media outlets “are working to protect the regime at the expense of the public.”
“Please prove us wrong,” he implored. It turns out that the New York Times can’t.
On Thursday, prosecutors lost a battle to keep some of the 14,000 hours of January 6 surveillance video that was accumulated by the FBI out of the public view. When some of this video was shown to the public, it became clear why the prosecution didn’t want it to get out: It didn’t fit the media-driven narrative of an ‘insurrection.’
Making matters worse for the news media that had claimed there had been an organized attempt to overturn the results of the election, an exclusive Reuters report from August obliterated the claim that Donald Trump directed extremists to attack the Capitol building and urged protesters to thwart a peaceful transfer of power.
“The FBI has found scant evidence that the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol was the result of an organized plot to overturn the presidential election result, according to four current and former law enforcement officials,” Reuters reported.
“Though federal officials have arrested more than 570 alleged participants, the FBI at this point believes the violence was not centrally coordinated by far-right groups or prominent supporters of then-President Donald Trump, according to the sources, who have been either directly involved in or briefed regularly on the wide-ranging investigations,” the report continued.
“Ninety to ninety-five percent of these are one-off cases,” said a former senior law enforcement official with knowledge of the investigation. “Then you have five percent, maybe, of these militia groups that were more closely organized. But there was no grand scheme with Roger Stone and Alex Jones and all of these people to storm the Capitol and take hostages.”
Thus, the FBI has provided substantiation that many of those arrested on January 6 were Trump-supporting MAGA tourists swept up in the Capitol riot around them. Donald Trump had nothing to do with ordering an “insurrection,” and indeed, there was never even an “insurrection” to begin with.
OPINION: This article contains commentary which reflects the author's opinion.