TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

The January 6th events at the US Capitol are described as disgraceful and a deliberate assault on democracy. Bobby Powell, a retired radio journalist, claims to have video evidence of provocateurs or suspicious actors present at the Capitol. Powell describes witnessing a man removing a window and encouraging others to enter, as well as another man pushing people inside while yelling, "hold the line." He sent the video to the FBI but says the individuals have not been identified. Powell expresses frustration that his evidence and similar findings by attorney Brad Guyer are being ignored by media and politicians. Another speaker claims a group of provocateurs broke away and coordinated the removal of bike racks. They allege that suspicious actors provoked police and removed barriers, creating space for the crowd to enter, suggesting that most people believed they had permission to be there. One speaker claims that the FBI, not Trump supporters, led the insurrection.

Jake Lang describes his experience surrounding January 6 and the aftermath of his detention. - Lang was never sentenced or found guilty of a crime, yet he spent four years and six days in prison. He says the Biden administration canceled the constitution, and asserts the FBI had embedded 274 agents to rile up a peaceful protest into a domestic extreme event to harm President Trump’s 2024 run. - He claims the event was staged to be used against Trump, and that the domestic terrorism frame and Patriot Act were used to suspend constitutional rights, with trials repeatedly kicked off. - Lang states that many detainees, including himself, spent years in solitary confinement without access to bond, having no criminal record. He contrasts this with cashless bail reforms in D.C., Chicago, and New York, where "career criminals" with numerous arrests were released quickly. - He says he was never afforded the same level of justice as those individuals, describing his time as a gulag and saying he prayed and kept faith during incarceration. He was released after 1,467 days to his fiancé Rachel, his father, and thousands of supporters outside the DC gulag. - To cope, Lang joined activities such as push-ups and reading the Bible; he hosted a political prisoner podcast with the Gateway Pundit featuring guests like General Flynn and Dinesh D’Souza, and occasionally appeared on Newsmax to share his story. - He maintained faith that whatever a judge—referred to as “wicked activist judges in DC”—decides would not be his fate, believing a higher plan was in store. - Lang is now running for the U.S. Senate in Florida to take Marco Rubio’s seat. He references a lawsuit alleging that Christopher Wray lied before a congressional panel about having knowledge of undercover agents at the Capitol on January 6; he claims Kash Patel indicated there were 274 agents, an overreach of normal procedures. - He states that the lie led to destroyed families, home raids, gunpoint confrontations, and fear nationwide. He notes red dot gun sights, long periods away from family, and visible dehumanization, including a photo of him with a beard and ponytail during imprisonment. - Lang points to the perceived double standard of justice, noting a Doge staffer who appeared with Elon Musk received a light punishment for assault, while Jan Sixers faced harsher consequences. He closes by highlighting efforts to rebuild lives for Jan Sixers through j6rebuild.com, urging support for those affected. Notes: Lang mentions ongoing activities, his Senate campaign, and calls for support for those impacted by January 6.

We lack control over the FBI as we don't control the White House. Releasing the January 6 tapes, which I support, may lead to the identification of individuals involved. However, this also means that the Department of Justice will pursue more people. I don't want anyone to suffer like Matthew Perna or Brandon's family. John, I don't want you to go to jail. I don't want this to happen to anyone else due to sick individuals who use facial recognition software to target others. It's overwhelming and needs to stop.

In December 2020, federal agents approached Jeremy Brown to be an informant, but he exposed them instead. He later got arrested, and his legal team is presenting evidence that the grenades and national defense documents found in his home were planted by the agents. The agents turned off all recording devices during the search, and none of them had body cameras. DNA tests on the grenades did not match Jeremy's DNA, and a dog hair and carpet fiber found on the grenades did not match his dogs or carpet. Criminal counts found on a CD were proven to not be in Jeremy's possession. The government is now targeting people who were in Washington DC on January 6th. Jeremy is fighting for his freedom.

On January 6th, the speaker was not inside the Capitol but was visited by the FBI at their mom's apartment. Simultaneously, the FBI also went to the speaker's own apartment. The speaker had a regular doorbell camera, which captured an FBI agent putting a sticker over its lens. However, the agent was unaware that there was also a camera in the peephole of the door. The speaker questioned why the cameras were being neutralized if the FBI had a legal search warrant. The speaker described the scene as resembling a herd of cattle going through the apartment, raising concerns about living in a police state and wondering if they could be the next target.

In this video, a man in Provo, Utah records a confusing clip of an FBI SWAT team raiding his elderly neighbor's home. The man was wanted for threats against the President and interstate threats. The FBI had been surveilling him since March and had previously spoken to him without aggression. The speaker questions why the FBI chose to conduct a predawn raid and wonders if there was evidence that the man was planning something dangerous. They express concern that this raid may be a show of force and a message to the public. The speaker calls for more information, including body cam footage and all evidence.

I'm Steve Baker, and I'm an independent journalist who was arrested for covering the January 6th protests. Despite working as a journalist, the FBI singled me out and charged me with crimes like disruptive conduct for simply being there. I was even asked to surrender in shorts and flip-flops, likely to be put in an orange jumpsuit, but my attorney negotiated against it. While being processed, I was cuffed, fingerprinted, and leg chained. An assistant US attorney named Adam Dreher is responsible for my case. Despite some support, no mainstream media has defended me. This is a clear case of political tyranny.

A woman was shown a picture that resembled her and joked about it. Later, two FBI agents visited her workplace, asking about her whereabouts on January 6th. They threatened her boss with prison time for covering for her. The speaker questions if there is any court order allowing the monitoring of American citizens' text messages. The response mentions court orders authorizing search warrants and surveillance. The speaker emphasizes that search warrants should specify what is being searched or seized, but this is not happening. They express concern about the use of software to target individuals who haven't committed crimes. Another speaker discusses the rise of dangerous extremists and their involvement in acts of violence, including the January 6th insurrection. They inquire about the Department of Justice's efforts to address this threat.

In this video, there are discussions about the involvement of FBI agents and informants in the events of January 6th. Questions are raised about whether they committed crimes or encouraged violence. The focus then shifts to a man named Ray Epps, who was initially on the FBI's most wanted list but was later removed. The video also shows footage of individuals removing fences and discusses how easy it was for people to be drawn into the breach site. The brother of a man involved in the Capitol insurrection is interviewed, highlighting their political differences. There are also mentions of Antifa and questions about Speaker Pelosi's involvement. The video concludes with criticism of the January 6th committee's refusal to ask important questions.

He says he was in Washington DC on January 6 and 'recorded video of two federal agents attacking the building.' He states he has 'given the FBI twenty nine minutes of high definition video' says, 'What what format do we got? MP four.' He adds, 'No copyright. I don't care about getting paid. I just want it out there.' He explains that, despite offering the footage, 'neither man's been arrested' and 'the FBI refuses to accept my offer to come in and give them a statement and all of the video that I took on the fifth, sixth, and seventh.' He says the FBI is 'desperate to keep their identities hidden.' He notes he has appeared on 'OAN and Newsmax' and 'played the video there.' He is in town this weekend. 'If you wanna have me on your show as a guest, I'm more than happy to go do so.'

I’m doing my show like normal, and I’m reaching the end of the show when I see an alert from my Ring doorbell: somebody’s at the front door. I’m live, reading super chats and live chat messages, and I see that this guy has a loaded gun. He’s got a motorcycle helmet and a backpack, a gun drawn, and he’s knocking on the door yelling. I didn’t want to tip him off that I knew he was there, so I kept the show going for about a minute, then wrapped it up quickly. My producer runs in and I ask, who is that? What’s going on? He says, I called the cops. They’re here. The guy’s gone. Then I start getting changed out of my suit, and I hear gunshots go off outside. I jumped to the ground, not knowing what was happening. I step outside after the dust settles and there are about 10 cop cars up and down the street, the whole block locked down, the alley shut down. They tell me to get back inside. We’re not allowed to leave until the morning. That’s how late they were there. At the end of the night, after the cops left, I went out in the very early morning. Did anyone come and explain anything to you? No. Nobody said anything. It’s ridiculous. In the morning, I asked the guy what happened, and he told me the story. It turns out the shooter is a 23-year-old white man, a “white nerd,” short guy, who was at the University of Illinois in Urbana-Champaign, about two hours south of where I live. He killed three people earlier in the day: his roommate, killed the roommate’s sister, and killed the roommate’s mother. He then got in his car and drove directly to my house, parked outside, got out a .22 pistol and an automatic crossbow (a weird choice), and knocked on my door. He went around the house, tried the back door, tried the front door. The cops pulled up, he took off running through the gangway, hopped the fence, and ran into the neighbor’s house. I guess he went into the neighbor’s basement because the door was unlocked. He was hiding from the police. He shot two of the neighbor’s dogs, which is devastating. He ran back outside, and the cops spotted him. He shot at the cops. The cops shot him in the face, and he died on the spot. What was his motive? They never told me. To this day, I have no idea. There’s no explanation. There was no contact after the incident. The Illinois State Police came by about a week later to retrieve the Ring camera footage of the whole incident, and I downloaded that onto a thumb drive. That’s it. I never heard from the cops, never heard from the government. Not at all. A guy comes to murder you, kills three others and two dogs, and no one bothers to tell you anything? It’s ridiculous.

We had full cooperation from the Capitol Police and the speaker's office, but we couldn't show that FBI agents were present in the crowd, which the FBI has admitted. Ray Epps was not a civilian; he encouraged violence, yet the January 6th committee defended him. There were clear signs of federal involvement, like individuals with earpieces breaking things and then fleeing. I didn't want to wrongly label anyone as an agent without proof. The recent Proud Boys trial revealed an FBI agent lied and hid evidence. We need crowdsourcing for the footage, which should be public. The narrative around January 6th has been misrepresented; it was a violent political demonstration, not a deadly insurrection. Intelligence about the event was withheld from Capitol Police, suggesting a deliberate attempt to create chaos for political gain.

- it's illegal. The FBI will raid me. They've done it twice. - No. It's not secret. No. It's not on OAN and Newsmax. - Why isn't the FBI looking for two metaphysically attacked? Exclusive inside FBI fomenting insurrection. No? - Well, see, I was at the East Entrance on January 6. - I recorded two federal agents attacking the capital. - Well, federal agents came to my home and took my phones. They still have that. So, hopefully, someone will stand out. - I've given them twenty nine minutes of high definition footage of these two turds. - And to date, neither one of them has been arrested and none of their images have appeared on the internet. - They refuse to accept my offer to come in and give them a statement. - I've got them by the Cajones. - Avoid the FBI if you can.

There were multiple improbable factors that would have had to align for these bombs to be discovered at the same time on a sidewalk, prompting questions about a broader conspiracy and how such a scenario could unfold. The speakers emphasize that while they want to avoid a conspiracy path, there are many questions still open, including the handling of video footage. Regarding video records, one speaker notes that they want to review January 6 video to see if anyone returned to the locations, but that video apparently does not exist anymore. They do have January 5 video, but have been told that no one preserved January 6. This raises eyebrows as they consider whether the devices were placed by an inexperienced person who was trying to set them down quickly or whether the devices were left to be found. Mrs. Younger’s account is highlighted: she walked out her back door and did not see anything earlier in the morning, but saw the devices later, which would give a reason to believe she would have noticed them if they had been there in the morning. This observation is part of why they want to talk to her. One speaker is blown away by a point: according to the FBI, the FBI’s internal data indicate 39,000 videos showing the hoodie-clad pipe bomber—referred to as the C. Virkel bomber—movements that night, from various camera angles. Washington, DC, Capitol Hill is described as among the most surveilled areas in the world. Yet there is a claim that there is no footage from January 6 of the actual areas a person would have had to travel to place the pipe bombs. The other speaker confirms that there are cameras along some Capitol Police lines that show walking paths, including footage from Capitol Police cameras, but the angles that would show positions behind the RNC and behind the DNC do not exist today, at least not in a way that captures the relevant movements. This absence has limited the investigation into the theory that the devices could have been placed earlier and then moved or re-placed. They are now going back through Capitol Police footage, including from the Fairchild Building near the DNC, which has provided the most evidence so far. The team is reviewing hours from about 8 PM on May 5 to 1 PM on January 6 to determine whether anyone else passed by, whether there was any suspicious activity, and whether the devices were moved again. The investigators are evaluating step-by-step explanations for these anomalies, considering whether the Secret Service dog failed to detect one device or whether Mrs. Younger missed the other, whether the devices were not present at that time, or whether weather and other factors affected detections. They acknowledge that with so many circumstances, some “smoke” might indicate “fire.” They hope the FBI is reviewing cell phone data to determine if the suspected bomber returned or if a co-conspirator was involved in setting timers or re-placing devices. The transcript ends with an acknowledgment of ongoing investigation scope and questions.

Clay Higgins, a former law enforcement officer and congressman, discusses his concerns about the FBI's involvement in the events of January 6th. He claims that undercover FBI agents and informants were present in the Capitol before the protesters arrived. Higgins also argues that the FBI has been infiltrating and surveilling American citizens who express frustrations with COVID restrictions. He calls for the release of all digital evidence related to January 6th, believing it will reveal the truth about what happened. Higgins expresses his commitment to fighting for the truth and defending individual rights and freedoms.

A friend involved in the January 6th events has been in jail for hundreds of days without trial, raising concerns about due process. Footage shows police opening doors and guiding protesters, suggesting a lack of intent for insurrection. The idea of an armed insurrection without weapons is questioned, and misinformation about police deaths is discussed. There’s a recognition that government agents may have incited actions that day, complicating the narrative. While acknowledging the poor decisions made, there's a call for accountability and a push for the January 6th prisoners to receive trials. The conversation emphasizes the need for transparency and standing against injustices.

Speaker 0 warns against entering a certain location. Speaker 1 discusses a video clip showing a broken window and the departure of the police. Speaker 0 clarifies that they heard the radio communication ordering the police to leave. Speaker 1 mentions an individual with red hair being confronted and identifies them as an undercover FBI agent. Speaker 0 confirms this and describes another clip where a crowd tries to enter the Capitol building. They mention being pushed and sprayed with pepper spray. Speaker 0 captures footage of an individual leaning against a doorpost. The transcript ends.

This account describes a deeply personal experience tied to the January 6 events and the author’s broader concerns about government overreach and the persecution of dissent. The speaker asserts that their journey is real and not abstract, detailing actions taken against them by federal authorities. Key points include: - The speaker was arrested by the FBI, placed in a cell, and branded a terrorist by their own government. - Their teenage son, who was sleeping in Los Angeles, was followed by TSA agents and placed on a watch list. - The speaker’s bank accounts were flagged, their reputation attacked, and they were effectively sentenced by a system that allegedly knew the accusations were false but did not correct them. - The speaker references recent media coverage to claim a shift in official acknowledgment: news reports allegedly confirm that there were hundreds of undercover FBI informants present on January 6, contradicting earlier statements that there were none, and even later statements suggesting only a few. - The speaker insists on recounting these events in their book, “Selective Persecution, the Legalization of American Fascism,” not as a pundit but as a witness, arguing that what happened to them could happen to anyone. The speaker emphasizes the breadth and seriousness of what they describe as state actions: targeting an individual with legal and reputational damage, coupled with surveillance and coercive measures affecting family members and financial standing. The narrative frames these experiences as part of a broader pattern of government behavior surrounding January 6, asserting that the claims are supported by new reporting about FBI informants on the scene. Overall, the account centers on personal testimony of alleged misconduct by federal authorities, the collateral impact on family members, and a broader claim about systemic abuse and misinformation surrounding January 6, framed within the author’s critique of American political dynamics as described in their book.

An individual confronts two individuals identifying themselves as FBI agents, demanding their full names and identification. The agents decline to provide full names on camera. The individual states they will post the recording online. The agents say they want to talk about a post that was made. The individual accuses the agents of wasting taxpayer money investigating something that is not against the law. Another individual asks why they came. One of the agents says they wanted to make sure that weren't any. The individual accuses them of being part of a regime and not believing in the Constitution. The individual calls the agents "fuckheads" and "cowards" and says they should be embarrassed and think about what they did. The agents then leave.

I have a friend who participated in the January 6th events and has been in jail for hundreds of days without trial. This seems unjust, as due process is expected. Watching the footage, it appeared that some officers were allowing people in, and there were even agents inciting the crowd. The narrative around police deaths that day is misleading; one officer died of a stroke, not due to protesters. Many people were involved in the chaos, but the lack of weapons suggests it wasn't a true insurrection. There were government agents encouraging the actions, raising questions about their intentions. It’s crucial to speak out against these issues, especially when it comes to the treatment of those still imprisoned without trial.

An individual provided video footage purportedly showing two federal agents attacking the Capitol on January 6th. A defense attorney for the Oath Keepers filed a motion identifying 80 "suspicious actors" and "material witnesses" present at the Capitol on January 6th who have not been arrested or charged. These individuals were concentrated in areas where trouble occurred, including the East Side and the Columbus doors. The attorney alleges some worked in tactical two-man teams and were later seen on the terrace. He seeks to identify them using facial recognition and questions if the events were staged. A radio journalist captured footage of two individuals he believed to be government agents. One was encouraging people to enter the Capitol after a window had been broken, even pulling out a pane of glass himself. When he realized he was being filmed, he blamed a protester and shoved him. The other individual was holding open the Columbus doors with a wooden pole and pushing people inside. The journalist who shot the video said the man shoved him. One person claims that the FBI, not Trump supporters, led the insurrection at the Capitol on January 6th.

Speaker 0 claims to have video footage from January 6th of two federal agents attacking the Capitol. Speaker 0 states they have been trying to get the FBI to investigate for over a year, providing them with twenty-nine minutes of high-definition footage. Speaker 0 says the FBI has not arrested the agents, nor have their images appeared online. Speaker 0 claims the FBI refuses to accept a statement or view video from January 5th, 6th, and 7th. Speaker 1 says the FBI raided them twice, came to their home, and took their phones. Speaker 1 advises Speaker 0 to avoid the FBI if possible.

An individual visited a radio station (97.7 FM) to share video footage from Washington D.C. on January 6th, alleging it shows two federal agents attacking the building. The speaker claims to have provided the FBI with 29 minutes of high-definition video in MP4 format on January 15th. The video was recorded on an iPhone. According to the speaker, neither of the agents in the video have been arrested, nor have their images been released online. The speaker also claims the FBI has declined their offer to provide a statement and additional video from January 5th, 6th, and 7th. The speaker believes the FBI is actively concealing the agents' identities. The speaker states they have shared the video with OAN, Newsmax, Detroit, and Red America's Voice. They offered the video to the radio station and are available for an on-air appearance.

During the Capitol incident, a law enforcement officer recounts being attacked and called a traitor. Another person claims that the officer was actually an FBI plant, not in uniform, and carrying a Confederate flag. They believe the narrative is unraveling and demand the release of FBI files to reveal the true culprits.

An FBI or federal agent is seen in a picture encouraging people to enter the Capitol on January 6th. One person expresses hesitation, but eventually agrees to go. They discuss the purpose of the barriers and claim that the Capitol is their house. They believe there were instigators intentionally placed among the crowd. They express gratitude to those who caused trouble and suggest that someone on their side may have switched allegiances. The speaker mentions a pastor's lengthy sermon that some people didn't want to hear. They observe individuals shaking the barriers and point out the presence of an FBI agent in the crowd.