reSee.it - Related Video Feed

The speakers discuss their plans to enter the capital and coordinate with other individuals. They mention meeting at specific locations and express their intention to take action. They discuss the use of guns and munitions and mention the need for gas masks. They also mention clearing certain areas and holding the line. The speakers express frustration with the lack of organization and communication. They discuss the presence of law enforcement and their efforts to navigate the building. The speakers mention specific locations within the capital and discuss their strategy for moving forward.

Two speakers discuss going into the capital tomorrow, insisting on a plan despite hesitation. They oscillate between urgency and caution: "Tomorrow, we need to go into the capital" and "I don't even like to say it because I'll be arrested." They try to keep the rhetoric "Peaceful" and "Fed" in the mix, then confirm aloud: "We need we need to go I'll say it. Alright." A sharply cut interjection—"Shut the fuck up, Uber"—is followed by: "To the capital." They label it as "Based Fed posting? Yeah. Need to go into the capital." The exchange ends with a resigned acknowledgment: "I didn't see that coming in. Okay."

The video explores the question of whether undercover agents or assets for the federal government played a role in agitating people to enter the Capitol on January 6th. The focus is on a man named Ray Epps, who was captured on video encouraging protesters to go into the Capitol. The video analyzes Epps' interactions with Baked Alaska, a livestreamer, and highlights Epps' repetitive phrases and unusual behavior. It also reveals a previously unseen conversation where Epps whispers, "storm the Capitol" to Baked Alaska. The video raises questions about Epps' possible involvement and the lack of attention given to his actions.

The conversation centers on a set of claims and observations about January 6 that orbit around Sedition Hunters, Ray Epps, and the so-called “Northwest Scaffold Commander.” The speakers discuss and link multiple pieces of information to argue that the FBI and other agencies were paying close attention to, or coordinating with, covert actor networks on that day. - The discussion opens with a reference to a John Solomon article about Sedition Hunters and claims that the FBI and Justice Department paid Sedition Hunters about $150,000 to gather evidence on January 6 protesters to help the FBI make arrests. They note the figure was reported as over $100,000 in some places and $150,000 in a House hearing, and they say the FBI/DOJ paid Sedition Hunters, the SPLC, the ADL, the Atlantic Council, DFR Lab, and Bellingcat for intelligence. - The main focus shifts to a piece titled Meet Ray Epps (December 2021) by the speakers’ interlocutor, where they argue that the “main star of the show” was not Ray Epps, but a different figure labeled Northwest Scaffold Commander (referred to as Scaffold Commander). They emphasize that Sedition Hunters’ archives identified Scaffold Commander as their number-one suspect, although he was not placed on the FBI’s most-wanted list. - They recount how, on January 8, 2021, the FBI’s most-wanted list listed Ray Epps as a top suspect in the case, with public calls for information and a cash reward. By late June 2021, a Phoenix newspaper identified him as “Reyes,” and on July 1, 2021, the FBI removed Epps from the wanted list with no explanation and no arrest. They contrast this with Scaffold Commander, who was never added to the FBI’s public wanted list for identification by the public, despite being the focal point of Sedition Hunters’ investigations. - The speakers describe Scaffold Commander as an older man with glasses, a nerdy mask, and a blue cap, who allegedly directed the breach from the Northwest scaffold overlooking the Capitol. They claim he used a bullhorn to issue commands for approximately 18 minutes to an hour and a half, from 1:00 PM to about 2:30 PM, urging the crowd with phrases like “Move forward,” “Don’t just stand there,” “Help somebody over the wall,” and “We gotta fill up the capital.” - They juxtapose these observations with the chronology of the breach: the first breach around 12:53 PM, the crowd’s advance toward the Capitol, and the moment rioters entered the building. They argue Scaffold Commander acted as a ringleader and that Ray Epps was directly beneath him in the crowd, effectively functioning as an internal participant who helped draw people toward the front. - A key point they stress is that Scaffold Commander’s high perch and commanding role align with a long-cited CIA manual from 1983, Psychological Operations in Guerrilla Warfare, which describes a small cadre of crowd agitators operating from elevated positions to direct slogans and crowd movement. They quote and reference passages describing an “outside commando element” that stays above the crowd to observe and direct a demonstration, using high observation points to shout instructions and guide the crowd’s actions. - The speakers argue that the FBI has not acknowledged Scaffold Commander, has not included him on any public list, and has not publicly solicited identification for him, despite Sedition Hunters’ focus on him as the pivotal organizer. They suggest that internal FBI records, memos, or emails about Scaffold Commander could be highly revealing, potentially showing whether higher-ups instructed not to pursue him. - They conclude by urging the FBI and related investigators to search their internal records for “Northwest Scaffold Commander” and make any relevant documents public, implying that such records could undermine the official narrative of the event. They also frame the existence of an internal, externally guided command structure as a critical piece of the January 6 story that remains underexplored by authorities.

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.

Speaker 1 describes their experience at the Capitol, stating that they were not violent and did not support the actions of those who were. They emphasize that they were there to make a symbolic statement and show their frustration with the current state of the country. Speaker 1 mentions that some individuals associated with Antifa were causing trouble and being aggressive towards the police. They also mention helping someone who had an epileptic seizure. Speaker 0 confirms that Speaker 1 is credible and mentions that Speaker 1 believes Antifa breached the gates, leading to others following suit.

On January 5, 2021, Epps was seen in the crowd urging people to enter the Capitol, which led to the crowd chanting "fed." The behavior raised questions about his intentions. The following day, Epps was observed whispering to an individual, who then proceeded to forcibly tear down barricades. There are inquiries about whether Epps encouraged this action.

Discussion centers on the agent provocateur angle of January 6. They claim there were federal agents involved in instigating the violence and entering the Capitol, and that "this one guy" has faced no legal consequences while others face "massive federal charges and four years plus in jail." They compare to the World Trade Organization riots in Seattle '99, saying "literal government agents went in wearing antifa outfits" to provoke violence and were released conveniently. They focus on "Ray Epps, the Fed protected provocateur who appears to have led the first January 6 attack on the US Capitol," referencing a Revolver article and a video. They debate whether he was initiated by government, radicalized and acting on his own, or a rogue agent; they note it shows intelligence agency problems. They worry about autocratic solutions and how social media exposes such cases; they end with "Red or black" and Ray Epps.

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.

Discussion centers on alleged agent provocateur involvement in January 6. Speakers describe a theory that "federal agents ... instigating the violence, instigating the entering into the capital," and point to "this one guy" who is isolated on video yet faced no legal consequences. They discuss "Ray Epps, the Fed protected provocateur who appears to have led the very first one six attack January 6 attack on The US capital," and contrast him with others prosecuted. They debate whether the provocateur acted under government direction, was radicalized, or acted independently as a psycho, noting "this guy's doing this, like, over and over again." They reference the World Trade Organization in Seattle as a precedent for provocateurs, and note "100,000 different cameras" enabled scrutiny. A concern is raised about "an autocratic government that controls all aspects of society so none of this ever happens."

"He is calling for going into the capital the evening before January 6." "And this isn't just a one off, someone some crazy who comes and goes. No." "He goes repeatedly to group after group, redirecting them saying, we need to go into the capital." "on January 6, it's a veritable, where's Waldo? He's everywhere." "twenty seconds before the very first breach of the capital, this individual Ray Epps whispers into someone's ear," "So he's everywhere." "But what it did do is said that Ray Epps was acting alone." "the FBI scrubbed Epps's face from their database, from their public database, just a day after Revolver ran a report on his fellow oath keeper, Stuart Rhodes, who is also unindicted."

Monument Hill. 'President is good speaking. We are going to the capital where our problems are. It's that direction. We spread the word.' The speaker notes the plan to move toward the capital to address issues and spread the message. 'Alright. No, Dave. But one more thing. Yeah. So can we go up there?' They then ask for permission to advance and discuss possible entry. 'No? When we go in Are we gonna get arrested when go up there?' The exchange continues with concern about violence, as they respond, 'Yeah. You don't need to get shot. Arrest us all?' today.

Speaker describes Ray Epps as "a man walking about a psychological paradox as the events of January 6 are unfolding because he seems to be singularly driven by this desire to get people to enter the capital, but then he is overwhelmingly concerned with no harm to officers or nothing that would, impair the operations of potentially other people that could have been acting at the behest of the federal government." "What were the tells that this didn't strike you as a genuine MAGA grandfather?" The piece hinges on "the video footage itself," with Revolver News' clip "Where's Waldo?" following Epps from January 5 into January, sixth. He argues there was "no plan by in the case of the Trump supporters to go in." He was at the barricade on January 6, and "the very first breach of the Capitol occurred literally two seconds after this same Ray Epps whispers into somebody's ear." Described as "professional"—"cool cucumber" and a "cold professional," proficient at crowd control. Red flags include "radical extreme suggestions" like "let's go into the capital," with a "weird emotional detachment" from the content of what someone is saying.

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 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.

The speakers discuss the Capitol incident on January 6th and focus on a person named Ray Epps. Speaker 1 claims that Epps caused damage and was initially on the FBI's list of top twenty people involved. However, Epps allegedly used his contacts within the organization to remove himself from the list. Speaker 1 saw Epps on January 5th near the BLM Plaza in Washington DC, where there was a protest. Speaker 1 urges the FBI to investigate Epps further. Speaker 0 expresses skepticism towards the media and Speaker 1 offers to call them instead of providing a phone number. The conversation ends with Speaker 0 requesting a way to contact Speaker 1.

On January 5th, outside BLM Plaza, a man named Ray Epps approached Speaker 1 and repeatedly urged them to go into the Capitol. Speaker 1 moved away from Epps, but he followed and continued instructing the crowd. Epps's statement, "We need to go into the Capitol. Tomorrow," became famous. Speaker 0 also expressed their readiness to enter the Capitol. Speaker 1 questioned whether Epps was part of a scripted plan or an undercover agent inciting violence. The video ends with Speaker 0 stating that they are heading towards the Capitol, where they believe their problems lie.

On January 20, 2025, there are concerns that he might show up at the White House uninvited, which could lead to trouble. One person doubts he would do that, arguing there was no attack on the Capitol. The other insists there were violent actions, including breaking windows and harming police officers. The first speaker argues that no one died that day from violence, citing a police officer who died of natural causes later. The second speaker counters that there were indeed casualties, specifically mentioning Officer Brian Sicknick, who died after the events. The discussion reflects differing views on the Capitol incident and its aftermath.

Some individuals had planned to storm the Capitol, and tomorrow they intended to carry out their plan. Although I hesitate to mention it, as it could lead to my arrest, I will say it anyway. We must enter the Capitol. Let's go.

In a brief, on-the-scene exchange, Speaker 0 asks a woman what happened to her. Speaker 1 responds that she was maced. The conversation reveals that she was attempting to go inside a cafe when the incident occurred: she had made it “like a foot inside,” then was pushed out, and they maced her. Speaker 0 continues by asking for her name and where she is from. In reply, Speaker 1 identifies herself as Elizabeth and states that she is from Knoxville, Tennessee. When asked why she wanted to go inside, Speaker 0 frames the moment by noting the surrounding activity, “We’re storming the Capitol. It’s a revolution. Thank you.” Elizabeth’s answer to the question about her motive is explicit: she says that she and others are involved in actions described as storming the Capitol, and she characterizes the situation as part of a revolution.

Speaker 0 contemplates marching on the Capitol, acknowledging the risk of arrest. They say, 'I know. In fact, tomorrow, I don't even like to say it because I'll be arrested. Well, let's not say it. We need we need to go I'll say it. Alright.' They urge action with, 'We need to go in to the capital. Let's go.' They preface with, 'I'm gonna put it out there,' and confess, 'I'm probably gonna go to jail tomorrow.' The message centers on a planned entry into the Capitol and the likelihood of facing jail, repeating the call to action 'We need to go into the capital.'

That one moment changed what we knew about Ray Epps that night when he whispered storm the capital before it had happened and echoed the official narrative before it was broadcast across the nation. Of supporters of president Trump stormed The US Capitol Building. We ran it through forensic software that technical investigators use for analyzing audio and video to make sure we heard correctly, and it had not been altered. Epps, who continued to direct people to the capital in the cold light of day on January 6, did not go into the capital himself, according to the January 6 committee and the FBI. He's never explained publicly why he said storm the capital, what he meant by that, or what he may have known. So why hasn't it been addressed? Nobody cared about the Ray Epp story.

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.

Speaker 0 argues that the individual is late, then urges going into the capital, which is described as incitement and premeditated. The speaker asserts the person is on video stating, “we need to breach the capital” and says this is very relevant because people ended up doing it. The claim is that the individual is instigating violence, trying to provoke or catalyze illegal acts so that the government can arrest those involved, describing undercover federal assets as honeypots that goad people into committing crimes to enable arrests of people law enforcement wanted to arrest anyway. The speaker then questions if the DOJ or federal law enforcement is seeking an insurrection, conspiracy, or acts of violence aimed at undermining an act of Congress, and asks why they aren’t looking into this person, suggesting that a lack of interest implies he may be part of the government or federal law enforcement. The implication is that there could be a reason for not pursuing him other than him being unaffiliated, namely that he is working with law enforcement. Ted Cruz is described as addressing this in a Senate hearing, with the speaker plan to read a report from the New York Post. The report is quoted: “magically, mister Epps disappeared from the public posting. According to public records, mister Epps has not been charged with anything. No one has explained why a person videoed, urging people to go to the capital, a person whose conduct was so suspect, the crowd thought he was a fed, would magically disappear from the list of people the FBI was looking at.” The overall claim is that Mister Epps, who encouraged people to go to the capital, vanished from FBI attention without explanation, despite being photographed urging action and being suspected by the crowd of being a federal agent.

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.