TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

There are some very suspect things about how the Hillary Clinton email investigation was handled. The fact that Loretta Lynch, who was the attorney general at the time, met with Bill Clinton on the tarmac right before Hillary had to speak with the FBI is definitely one of them. Also, Loretta Lynch told Jim Comey to publicly call this a matter, instead of a criminal investigation. These actions downplayed what Hillary Clinton had done while all the drama was being created around Donald Trump and the Russia collusion, which never materialized. What the American people are going to find out about the FBI is astonishing, especially the level of bias.

What needs to be established is whether the FBI and government agents used undercover operatives on January 6th. If evidence shows they had informants, it undermines the insurrection narrative. There’s reasonable suspicion of federal involvement, especially with video evidence of a person directing people into the building and the case of Ray Epps, who was briefly on the FBI's most wanted list. Two significant points support this: Epps’ sudden removal from the list suggests he may have been an informant, and FBI official Jill Sanborn's refusal to answer whether federal agents were involved indicates possible involvement. Her silence implies that confirming their presence could compromise ongoing operations.

BuzzFeed has just confirmed that the FBI had a, quote, “hand in nearly every aspect of the alleged plot, starting with its inception. In other words, the FBI helped plan it.” An FBI informant organized meetings to kidnap the governor. Another informant, quote, prodded the alleged mastermind of the kidnapping plot to advance his plan. And text from an FBI agent directed an informant to draw people into the conspiracy. In the end, it looks like there were more FBI snitches, informants, people working with the FBI involved in the plot than weren't. It was an FBI plot. So what does this suggest about January 6? We know there were FBI informants in the crowd. We know that for certain. Why can't we know their involvement in January 6 now that we're getting a sense of their involvement in this fake kidnapping plot? Julie Kelly of American Greatness discussed the Lansing April 2020 protest mirroring January 6, with militia groups in military gear, police stood down, firearms, and viral photographs. She cited the plausibility of FBI infiltration before January 6 and Revolver News Darren Beatty's article. The discussion called for leaders to question Christopher Wray.

New information has emerged regarding internal FBI messages related to January 6th. The messages reveal a demand to edit confidential human source reports and remove agent participation. In a recent court filing, it was disclosed that FBI special agent Nicole Miller compiled her messages in an Excel spreadsheet, which was produced to the US attorney's office. However, a closer examination of the spreadsheet uncovered over 1,000 hidden rows of messages. The documents also show an agent requesting Miller to edit out their presence in a CHS informant report. Additionally, there is mention of an FBI boss assigning the destruction of 338 items of evidence. These revelations suggest that the FBI was present during the January 6th events, infiltrating groups and inciting violence.

Why are there still so many facts we don't understand about January 6, and why is the Biden administration preventing us from knowing? The claim they are hiding more than ten thousand hours of surveillance tape is questioned, with Revolver News offering an answer. The government allegedly hiding the identity of many law enforcement officers who participated in the riot, with some named as unindicted co conspirators. Person two and person three are described as organizers, with Caldwell linked to a quick reaction force and not charged. Revolver News says there are upwards of 20 unindicted co conspirators in the Oathkeeper indictments. The piece asserts the insurrection was organized at least in part by government agents. It cites the FBI director's admission of infiltrating dissident groups, contrasts informant roles with paying people to organize violence, and discusses Whitmer and Garland; a former FBI official talks about rounding up dissent.

Three years after January 6th, questions remain about the events of that day and the FBI's involvement. Congressman Clay Higgins directly questioned FBI Director Chris Wray about whether FBI assets were embedded among the protesters. Higgins asserts that evidence suggests the FBI had undercover agents dressed as Trump supporters inside the Capitol before the doors opened, potentially entrapping attendees. He estimates over 200 FBI assets were present, influencing the crowd and orchestrating actions leading to arrests. Higgins emphasizes the need for transparency and urges Speaker Mike Johnson to release all digital evidence from that day to the public, believing it will reveal the truth about the government's role in the events of January 6th.

A recent report reveals that 26 confidential human sources were present during the January 6, 2021, Capitol riot. Of these, three were authorized by the FBI to monitor the event due to concerns over domestic terrorism. One of these sources entered the Capitol, while two others accessed restricted areas. The FBI did not authorize any sources to enter the building. Additionally, 23 other sources were present independently but had previously collaborated with the FBI. Notably, none of the sources who entered restricted areas were prosecuted, aligning with the DC US attorney's office's approach of not charging individuals for merely entering restricted grounds. Outgoing FBI director Christopher Wray has faced scrutiny regarding the agency's role on that day, emphasizing that the violence was not orchestrated by FBI sources or agents. Further information is anticipated from Capitol Hill and the White House.

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."

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.

The FBI had significant involvement in the events of January 6, with over 200 agents embedded within the crowd, including inside the Capitol, disguised as Trump supporters. They infiltrated online chat groups and social media platforms discussing opposition to COVID measures. Analysis of communications within these groups reveals that suggestions for potential violence or an occupation of the Capitol originated from these FBI agents. This indicates that the FBI's involvement extended well beyond January 6, influencing events in the preceding weeks and months. Additionally, recently released footage shows Capitol Police welcoming people into the Capitol, contradicting the initial narrative of an insurrection.

They say the FBI anticipated consternation around the election and actually prepared plans for January 6. They held a tabletop exercise in Boston in August 2020, five months before January 6. Kash Patel recently turned over memos to Congress at the request of Chairman Barry Lautenberg (Lautomilk) of the J-six investigation. The memos show the FBI knew there was a strong possibility of a hanging or contested election, with both sides agitated and likely to escalate to violence. They devised specific strategies, including embedding informants inside the groups where political violence or agitation might occur. They say the FBI had two dozen informants on the ground the morning of January 6. They also recommended mass prosecutions, even for the most minor crimes, which is described as exactly what the FBI did after January 6. Two big takeaways: the strategy appears to have been hatched months before and then carried out, and it involved a clear double standard compared to the political violence by the left in 2020. The FBI allegedly embedded informants in a broad range of groups, including Antifa and right-wing groups, and gathered intelligence suggesting a bad episode would occur. Barry Lautemux reportedly stated that while the warnings from informants were strong, the preparations of warnings to the brethren of the Capitol in Washington, DC did not exist. In other words, warnings were not passed along. The claim is that two failed examples of the Chris era of the FBI show that, knowing something was going to happen, they implemented a strategy that hurt conservatives but not liberals and did not warn the people who could actually prevent the violence. This is described as the legacy of the Chris Ray FBI, now laid open in documents for all to see. The question is whether any part shows that Bill Barr or Chris Ray briefed the president or his staff, or senior White House officials after the tabletop exercise and the development of the informant plan. The answer given is no: there is no documentation showing that the attorney general, Barr or other brass were briefed, and no mention that the White House, Homeland Security Department, Capitol Police, or Washington DC Metropolitan Police were alerted. The characterization is that the FBI remained insular, echoing the same “diseases” seen before nine-eleven.

According to declassified information, former CIA Director John Brennan is in trouble and may be indicted. A report from the House Select Committee on Intelligence alleges that Brennan knowingly published three reports containing information that was unclear, of uncertain origin, potentially biased, or implausible. While Brennan is entitled to due process, this evidence may be presented to a grand jury. James Comey's situation is less clear, suggesting Brennan faces the most significant exposure.

A recent memo from the acting FBI director, Brian Driscoll, revealed a list of FBI agents involved in the January 6th investigation, ordered by the deputy attorney general. This situation is unprecedented, as incoming administrations typically do not exert political control over the FBI. The memo indicates a potential purge of experienced agents, including those overseeing national security and criminal investigations, many of whom have been linked to cases that Donald Trump opposed. Additionally, political operatives have been placed in the FBI director's office, raising concerns about their influence on ongoing decisions. The implications of these changes could significantly impact the FBI's operations and integrity.

Why isn't FBI Director Chris Wray publicly defending his department's actions regarding the January 6th investigation? His resignation implies a lack of apolitical integrity within the FBI, suggesting that each presidential administration dictates priorities, rather than upholding a consistent, unbiased approach. This leaves the impression that wrongdoing occurred. The prioritization of the January 6th investigation over other crucial cases, like those involving child sex trafficking and serial killers, has negatively impacted agents' morale. However, some pushback exists; DC judges, including those appointed by both Republican and Democratic presidents, have openly criticized the Department of Justice's actions, refusing to allow these cases to be dismissed. Their outspokenness provides a counterpoint to the perceived silence from other quarters.

"James Comey decided not to work through the FBI press office when he wanted to change the narrative in Washington, burnish his reputation, against attacks from Democrats, and try to sully Donald Trump's reputation." "my goal was to improve negative stories about James Comey and to set a narrative, I e, set the Russia collusion narrative." "it depends what the meaning of the word is." "these are documents that were never given to Jim Jordan." "most classified information statutes have a five year statute of limitations, but there is a provision that extends it to ten years if it's willing and knowing." "Tomorrow though, I think we're gonna take people on a new destination, which is how often did the FBI get blocked in trying to investigate Hillary Clinton corruption at the Clinton Foundation?"

The New York Times published a report vindicating what we said months ago: FBI operatives were deeply involved in the events of January 6, the white supremacist QAnon insurrection. Citing, "confidential records," the newspaper reported that "the records suggest that federal law enforcement had a far greater visibility into the assault on the capital even as it was taking place than was previously known," and that an FBI handler was texting a member of the so called Proud Boys, they're America's greatest threat, at the Capitol Complex. Darren Beatty of Revolver. News says the extent is far more than the feds and the media were willing to admit. The NYT piece acknowledges two informants, and if the NYT is covering this, it's because the situation is far worse and there'll be many more informants coming to light. This creates a strategic dilemma for the feds and regime media: if informants existed, why didn't you stop it? The shift away from foreplanning undermines the conspiracy narrative behind one six and its prosecutions and commission. Either way, they're lying, and the effect is to strip law abiding patriotic Americans of their civil liberties. Darren Beatty of Revolver. News, which got this story right months before anybody else.

Under new leadership, the FBI is investigating a reported plan to infiltrate President Trump's first campaign. Back in 2015, under James Comey, the FBI allegedly launched a honeypot operation using two female undercover agents. A whistleblower claims this operation was separate from the Crossfire Hurricane investigation and lacked proper justification. According to reports, Comey directed the investigation without creating an official case file, raising concerns about potential misconduct. The inquiry is focused on identifying the undercover agents who reportedly infiltrated the Trump campaign at high levels. This is insane, the question is were they targeting Trump or his team? This is a problem that is not new, we need to find out if Comey was truly above board.

Speaker 0: "What I'm saying is a reasonable suspicion is that there were agents. There's a video showing a guy with an earpiece pulling people into the building. Alright? Mhmm. You combine that with the evidence of Ray Epps, and it looks like you have a preponderance of evidence suggesting there may have been federal law enforcement involved in making that thing happen." Speaker 1: "I'll get you beyond a reasonable doubt. Two pieces of information. Ray Epps was on FBI's most wanted list one day, and the next day, he was off of the FBI's most wanted list. There are only two ways that happens. You die or your informant." Speaker 1: "Put that aside. Under congressional testimony, Jill Sanborn, who I used to work with, the head of the FBI counterintelligence division in charge of all these investigations, testified under oath when senator Cruz asked her, flat out, were there federal agents involved with January 6? And she said, quote, senator, I can't answer that at this time." Speaker 1: "The reason she said I can't answer that is because of the same stonewalling they gave us during Russergate with Christopher Steelehauper and everybody else. It's the same narrative, and and I'm telling you they were there." Speaker 0: "You're so you're saying that she said I can't answer that because the answer is yes Yeah. And that would compromise whatever their operation was. Exactly."

During a hearing, a congressman questions Director Rick about the FBI's involvement in the events leading up to and on January 6th. The congressman asks if the FBI had confidential human sources dressed as Trump supporters inside the Capitol on January 6th, but Director Rick avoids giving a direct answer. The congressman also mentions evidence suggesting FBI informants attended the Stop the Steal rally on January 6th. Director Rick denies that the violence on January 6th was orchestrated by FBI sources or agents. The congressman then brings up two white buses that arrived at Union Station on January 6th, suggesting they were filled with FBI informants disguised as Trump supporters. The chairman interrupts the congressman's questioning, and the congressman objects to his question being closed. The congressman concludes by saying that their day is coming.

The FBI is facing allegations of internal political bias and a secret process for security clearances, according to an FBI whistleblower. The whistleblower claims that the FBI checks employees' loyalty by examining their support for the COVID-19 vaccine, Donald Trump, and the Second Amendment. Those who express conservative views or hesitancy towards the vaccine allegedly faced consequences, including suspension without pay. The FBI has not commented on the matter, but the whistleblower's representative suggests that this may be just the tip of the iceberg. The documents have raised concerns about the FBI's neutrality and the need for reform within the organization.

The Justice Department released a report revealing the FBI had 26 confidential human sources in DC on January 6th, with four entering the Capitol and 13 entering the restricted area. Questions arose regarding the discrepancy between this information and previous testimonies given under oath by FBI Director Ray. Concerns were raised about whether these sources instigated events, similar to the Gretchen Whitmer kidnapping plot. The media is accused of downplaying the report's significance, while Republicans claim the events were an inside job. The report's implications for January 6th defendants are discussed, particularly regarding potential pardons and whether confidential human sources are exempt from prosecution. Constitutional law professor Jonathan Turley questioned why the confidential human sources who entered the capital were not charged. Trump may pardon January 6th defendants. Tulsi Ganford may become the next DNI.

The FBI had over 200 agents embedded in the crowd on January 6th, some even posing as Trump supporters. They infiltrated online groups discussing COVID restrictions, leading discussions of violence. Capitol Police were seen welcoming people into the Capitol, contradicting the insurrection narrative.

Concerns about federal agents' presence on January 6 were raised, but there were no definitive answers regarding their involvement. One individual stated they had no personal knowledge of any agents present or their actions. Questions about confidential human sources from the FBI at the Capitol remain unanswered, with an upcoming report expected to provide some clarity. However, the report is still in draft form and undergoing classification review, making it uncertain if it will be released before the upcoming election. There is a suggestion that if any agents were present and broke the law, they should have followed established protocols, but details about reimbursements and specific actions remain unclear. Frustration was expressed over the lack of transparency and timely information from the FBI and DOJ.

Patriots, if you think you know the full story of January 6, think again, due to 'absolute dereliction of duty of the media in this country.' Darren Beatty of Revolver News says they reported in June that 'federal operatives... provided foreknowledge' and that there were 'federal informants participating in the rally and communicating that day with federal law enforcement.' The New York Times later noted that 'law enforcement had far greater visibility,' which Beatty calls 'a PR operation' to precede 'more damning revelations ahead,' predicting 'many, many informants scattered throughout the various militia groups imputed to one six.' He asks, 'if they had informants... why didn't they do anything to stop it?' He cites Michigan Whitmer, noting 'the head of the Detroit FBI field office' who ran that operation 'was promoted to lead the investigation into one six,' and mentions 'Stuart Rhodes' of the Oath Keepers, who 'has not been indicted' and that 'the feds took a single cell phone from him four months after One Six.'