TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

Speaker 0 highlights the aftermath of the January 6th violence at the Capitol, with over 1200 people charged and almost 900 convicted or pleading guilty. Trump, instead of labeling them criminals, refers to the insurrectionists as patriots and even promises to pardon them if he regains office. While Trump claims there was love on that day, the nation, including law enforcement, witnessed hate and violence. A Capitol police officer describes it as a medieval battle and expresses fear.

It's our constitutional duty to do oversight. "Now in that video, that was your answer to a question to me two years ago. When I said how many agents or assets of the government were present on January 5 and January 6 and agitating in the crowd to go into the capital and how many went into the capital. Can you answer that now?" "I don't know the answer to that question." "Oh, last time, you don't know how many there were or there were none?" "I don't know the answer to either of those questions. If there were any, I don't know how many." "You've had don't know whether there are any." "I think you may have just perjured yourself that you don't know that there were any. You want to say that again? That you don't know that there were any?" "In discovery, in the cases that were filed with respect to January 6, The Justice Department prosecutors provided whatever information they had about the question that you're asking." "With respect to mister Epps, the FBI has said that he was not an employee or informant of of the FBI." "Mister Epps has been charged, and there's a proceeding, I believe, going on today on that subject." "The charge is a joke."

Prosecutions have primarily targeted individuals who entered the building or engaged in violent conduct on Capitol grounds. However, anyone who knowingly entered the restricted area without authorization committed a federal crime. It’s clear that thousands occupied an area where they were not authorized to be.

The discussion centers on whether January 6 violence was an FBI operation. Speaker 0 denies that the violence at the Capitol was part of any operation orchestrated by FBI sources or agents. Speaker 1 asks if the FBI had an engagement with embedded agents; Speaker 0 repeats denial. Several speakers challenge the lack of answers about how many agents were present, suggesting informants were involved. Speaker 5 says "attorneys for the Proud Boys revealed at least 40 undercover informants were doing surveillance on the defendants that day, including 13 working in the DC Metro Police." Plainclothes MPD officers on Capitol Grounds are referenced. Speaker 6 says he provided high-definition video to lawmakers and accuses the FBI/DOJ of ignoring it; he describes an open window and an operative pulling it. Speaker 7 concludes: "it was the FBI and not Trump supporters who led the insurrection of the Capitol on January 6."

Speaker 0 expresses intent to storm the Capitol. Speaker 1 discusses Reyes' actions before the Capitol breach. The mob storms the Capitol. Questions arise about Reyes' involvement in inciting the violence. No clear answers are given.

Protesters forced their way into a federal government building in Washington, D.C. The speaker asks if both incidents, including the Capitol riot on January 6th and the extremists forcing their way into the Interior Department, should be considered domestic terrorism. The other speaker refuses to comment on specific matters and states that they need more evidence to make a legal determination. The first speaker criticizes the lack of transparency in releasing video footage and accuses the Department of Justice of not addressing the issue directly. They argue that both incidents should be prosecuted regardless of ideology, but the second speaker continues to avoid giving a clear answer.

Following an armed insurrection, the speaker calls for the resignation of the Capitol Police chief but wants the focus to remain on the President. There will be an after-action review, but the speaker does not want the review to be on par with the insurrection and impeachment. Schumer is reportedly going to fire the Senate Sergeant at Arms. The speaker states that they can pull the card out for Q&A if Audrey finishes the card. They can say they will call for something, but they don't know because they don't have all the blue dogs with them on this subject. Someone mentions that a person briefed on a plan with numbers and stakeholders signed off on it. Another person says that in a conversation, someone was very transparent about underestimating the crowd size and the president's influence. The speaker asks if they will stay there all day or until the National Guard arrives.

Speaker 1 states they are waiting to punch someone and will be happy to go to jail for it. Speaker 1 says, "We're trespassing when the cat will go." Speaker 0 says Speaker 1 said she has been trespassing on the Capitol. Speaker 1 repeats they are waiting to punch someone. Speaker 0 says that if Speaker 1 has been waiting for this, why did she deny Donald Trump's request? Speaker 0 claims it wasn't just negligence in forgetting the request, but that she denied the sergeant at arms from supplying the request.

"There's a concern that there were agents of the government or assets of the government present on January 5 and January 6, during the protests." "I'm need afraid I can't see that at all." "Alright. You have you have those images there, and they're captioned. They were from January 5 and January 6." "As far as we can determine, the individual who was saying he'll probably go to jail, he'll probably be arrested, but he wants every but they need to go into the capital the next day, is then the next day directing people to the capital." "And as far as we can find, this individual has not been charged with anything." "One of the norms of the justice department is to not comment on impending investigations and particularly not to comment about, particular scenes or particular individuals." "So I'm not gonna violate this norm of, of of, the rule of law. I'm not gonna comment on an investigation that's ongoing."

Speaker 1 states they are waiting to punch someone and will be happy to go to jail for it. Speaker 1 says, "We're trespassing when the cat will go." Speaker 0 says Speaker 1 stated, "I've been trespassing on the capitol." Speaker 1 repeats they are waiting to punch someone. Speaker 0 says if Speaker 1 has been waiting for this, why did she deny the sergeant at arms from supplying Donald Trump's request? Speaker 0 claims it wasn't just negligence, but that she denied the request.

In the brief exchange, Speaker 0 challenges Speaker 1 on two linked political questions regarding January 6. Speaker 0 asks whether Speaker 1 is concerned about a new January 6 committee finding that could render him liable for events that day and questions why the National Guard was not requested or deployed on January 6. The underlying aim is to scrutinize accountability and preparedness for the events of that day. Speaker 1 responds directly, insisting that he did not refuse the National Guard and attributing responsibility to the absence of a request from the president. He adds a sharp retort to Speaker 0, suggesting that Speaker 0 is presenting Republican talking points and labeling him as “a serious journalist,” implying a critique of the line of questioning and framing. Speaker 0 closes the exchange by reaffirming the public’s interest, stating that “The American people wanna know.” He reiterates that there are ongoing questions that remain unanswered, signaling a continued demand for accountability or clarification from Speaker 1. Overall, the exchange centers on responsibility and timing surrounding the National Guard on January 6, with Speaker 1 asserting that neither he nor the president took the actions that would have prevented or altered what occurred, while Speaker 0 emphasizes the public’s continuing desire for answers in light of January 6 committee findings. The interaction highlights tension between seeking accountability for the events of that day and defending the actions or inactions of political figures involved.

The speaker asks if the FBI had communication with their agents during the Capitol attack, to which Speaker 1 denies any involvement. Speaker 0 then asks about "ghost vehicles," but Speaker 1 is unfamiliar with the term. Speaker 0 claims to have evidence of two buses used by FBI informants disguised as Trump supporters during the attack. There is a brief interruption from Speaker 2, who reminds everyone to stay within their allotted time. Speaker 0 objects to his question being cut off, stating that the buses were nefarious and filled with FBI informants. The transcript ends with Speaker 2 attempting to move on to the next speaker.

It's our constitutional duty to do oversight. He asks, "how many agents or assets of the government were present on January 5 and January 6 and agitating in the crowd to go into the capital and how many went into the capital. Can you answer that now?" Speaker 1 replies, "I don't know the answer to that question." The exchange continues: "I don't know the answer to either of those questions. If there were any, I don't know how many." "You've had two years to find out." The discussion mentions Ray Epps: "yesterday, you indicted him. Isn't that a wonderful coincidence on a misdemeanor?" and says, "you're sending grandmas to prison." It references a video claim: "the guy on video who's saying go into the capital," noting "10 videos, and it's an indictment for a misdemeanor?" In discovery, "the Justice Department prosecutors provided whatever information they had about the question that you're asking." "With respect to mister Epps, the FBI has said that he was not an employee or informant of the FBI." "Mister Epps has been charged, and there's a proceeding, I believe, going on today on that subject." "The charge is a joke."

Speaker 0 asks Miss Sandburn about Ray Epps and his suspicious behavior during the January 6th incident at the Capitol. He mentions Epps chanting about getting into the Capitol and the crowd suspecting him of being a federal agent. Speaker 0 also brings up Epps whispering to someone who then tears down barricades. He questions whether Epps urged them to do so. Speaker 0 mentions the FBI's public post seeking information on individuals involved in violent crimes, including Epps, but later Epps disappears from the list. Speaker 0 expresses concerns about the government's involvement in encouraging illegal conduct on January 6th and asks if federal agents actively encouraged violence. Miss Sandburn denies any knowledge of such actions.

Speaker 0 claimed the former president was illegitimate for 4 years. Speaker 1 argued about conceding the election and potential violence in the future. They debated about the Capitol attack and the death of Capitol Police officer Brian Sicknick. Speaker 1 denied that anyone died during the attack, but Speaker 0 mentioned Sicknick's death.

Many were prosecuted for entering the building or engaging in violent conduct on Capitol grounds. Those who entered restricted areas without authorization committed a federal crime. Thousands occupied unauthorized areas.

A person asks John if he was at the Capitol. The person then asks John if he is with Black Lives Matter or right-wing people. John is on the phone during this exchange. The person asks again, "Are you Black Lives Matter?" Someone says John stated on the phone that he is not being charged with anything. The person repeats the question, "Are you Black Lives Matter, John?" John answers, "No."

Can you clarify the presence of federal agents or assets on January 5th and 6th? Specifically, how many were there, did they encourage people to enter the Capitol, and did any actually go inside? I can't comment on an ongoing investigation. Two years ago, you were asked the same question. Can you provide an answer now? I don't know the answer. So you don’t know how many were present or if there were any at all? I have no knowledge of that. You’ve had two years to find out.

Speaker 0 asks Speaker 1 if the FBI had any involvement with the violence at the Capitol on January 6th. Speaker 1 emphatically denies that the violence was orchestrated by FBI sources or agents. Speaker 0 then asks about "ghost buses," which are vehicles used for secret purposes in law enforcement. Speaker 1 is not familiar with the term. Speaker 0 claims that two buses that arrived at Union Station on January 6th were wiped clean and filled with FBI informants disguised as Trump supporters. Speaker 2 interrupts with a point of order, and the conversation becomes heated. The transcript ends with Speaker 0 expressing objection to his question being closed.

Many people entered the Capitol building without permission, which is a federal crime. Our focus is on prosecuting those who entered the building or engaged in violent or corrupt behavior on Capitol grounds. However, it's important to note that even those who entered the restricted area without authorization committed a federal crime. Thousands of people occupied an area where they were not allowed to be in the first place.

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.

Speaker 1 identified 48 people as antifa at the Capitol, most of them in disguises. They had Trump flags, American flags, and Trump hats to blend in. Some even entered the Capitol, including a Trumpster and a Viking, who were seen with Nancy Pelosi's daughter and her husband. These individuals are professional agitators from Antifa, not Trump supporters. Additionally, there were people with megaphones discussing the invasion of the Capitol.

The speaker questions witnesses about the presence and activities of federal agents or assets during the January 6th Capitol riot. One witness states they do not know if any federal agents or assets were present on January 5th or 6th, whether they agitated the crowd, or whether any entered the Capitol. The speaker suggests this may be perjury, noting the witness has had two years to find out. The speaker also asks about confidential human sources and the erection of gallows, claiming FBI Director Wray and Attorney General Garland have stonewalled inquiries. Another witness confirms their report will include information about confidential human sources operating on Capitol grounds on January 6th, but cannot provide a number. The report is in draft form and requires classification review, making its release before the upcoming election unlikely. The report will address whether confidential human sources followed DOJ protocols and include information about travel reimbursements. The speaker expresses frustration with the delay and lack of transparency.

The speakers discuss the definition of insurrection. Speaker 1 argues that the definition should be narrow and not include every act of force or threat against the government. They believe that historical context and duration should be considered. Speaker 0 questions where these conditions come from, citing a dictionary definition. Speaker 1 suggests looking at the State Attorney General's briefs for clarification. Speaker 2 interjects, stating that the breach of the Capitol during a core constitutional function could be seen as an insurrection. Speaker 1 responds by saying that there is no clear standard and it is subjective. Speaker 3 emphasizes the need to determine if the events of January 6th constituted an insurrection without needing a universal definition.

Speaker 0 expressed confusion about the lack of answers regarding two significant events on January 6. Firstly, other federal agencies withheld crucial information from the speaker, who was in charge of security at the Capitol. Secondly, despite the situation escalating for 71 minutes, Speaker Pelosi denied permission to bring in the National Guard. The speaker questioned why there is a lack of investigation into these matters, suggesting a lack of interest in uncovering the truth. The situation is described as worsening beyond these events.