Newsmax TV & Webwww.newsmax.comFREE - In Google Play
Newsmax TV & Webwww.newsmax.comFREE - On the App Store
Skip to main content
Tags: capital | capitol | fbi

Informant to FBI: We're Throwing a Party Jan. 6, Please RSVP

informant competence or not


Michael Reagan By with Michael R. Shannon Saturday, 19 November 2022 04:17 AM EST Current | Bio | Archive

The New York Times has the latest for us on the "Reichstag" riot that took place at the nation's capital on Jan. 6, 2021.

There are two contradictory interpretations of the events that took place that day and for some reason the FBI has been unable to see that both interpretations call the bureau's abilities into question.

The latest heavily redacted court filings that are open to the public reveal the FBI "had as many as eight informants inside the far-right Proud Boys in the months surrounding the storming of the Capitol. …

"The dispute about the informants in the Proud Boys came on the heels of revelations that the F.B.I. also had a well-placed source in the inner circle of Stewart Rhodes, the leader of the Oath Keepers militia, another far-right group that took part in the Capitol attack."

"Well–placed" would be the vice president of the group.

Any higher in the organization and the FBI would have been forced to give him a badge.

Federal prosecutors lean heavily on the first interpretation, which is: The Proud Boys "went to Washington on Jan. 6 with a plan in place to storm the Capitol and disrupt the transfer of power from President Donald J. Trump to Joseph R. Biden Jr."

In other words, your basic insurrection led by insurrectionists.

Were that the case, the question that must be asked is, if the FBI had so many informants at the top of both groups, why didn’t it stop the insurrection?

Prevent crime rather than reacting after the crime.

FBI apologists and workers on the informant farm think they have a logical, FBI-saving answer. According to The New York Times, "Former F.B.I. officials say there might have been gaps in what bureau intelligence analysts had told agents to ask their informants."

We are to believe that the FBI has informants in two groups who think the election was stolen. The groups are coming to D.C. on the same day the election results are to be ratified.

And Special Agent Clouseau doesn’t think to ask either group what they plan to do after reaching the city?

Does the we-didn’t-ask-any-obvious-questions-but-don’t-hold-that-against-us defense bring us to interpretation No. 2?

That, the FBI didn’t know what was going to happen?

We’ve often thought federal "informants" are just another government make-work, jobs program a step up from raking leaves but with less impact on the nation's culture.

It has all the earmarks.

Bloated supervisor to informant to participant numbers.

No accountability for results.

No penalty for failure.

It can be argued that interpretation No. 2 well makes our case for us.

Based on the charges, the FBI can’t have it both ways.

Either the special "geniuses" and their informants knew there was an insurrection a-comin’ and did nothing.

Or, they didn’t know anything about an insurrection because there was no plan for an insurrection and the charges are based on. information less-than-truthful.

Simply reinforcing security at the Capitol building would have kept the unruly, disorganized rioters out of the building, but those requests were turned down.

And don’t forget to use the lens of Donald Trump to evaluate the circumstances.

Which is worse for the president the Department of inJustice loathes? Breaking up the plot before anyone boards the Greyhound means video of cammo-wearing hairy men vanishes from the airwaves in a few days, which is what happened with the Whitmer Kidnapping Federal Jobs Program.

Letting them get to D.C. gives the bureau a chance to tie the plotters directly to Trump with the added bonus of the feds gleefully anticipating Trump will say something incendiary at the rally.

If the choice is between an attack that never happened and was thwarted by an alert crime-preventing FBI and an attack that did happen and can be blamed on former-President Trump all past experience points towards the choice of option two.

(Related articles may be found here, and here.)

Michael Reagan, the eldest son of President Reagan, is a Newsmax TV analyst. A syndicated columnist and author, he chairs The Reagan Legacy Foundation. Michael is an in-demand speaker with Premiere speaker's bureau. Read Michael Reagan's Reports — More Here.

Michael R. Shannon is a commentator, researcher for the League of American Voters, and an award-winning political and advertising consultant with nationwide and international experience. He is author of "Conservative Christian's Guidebook for Living in Secular Times (Now with added humor!)" Read Michael Shannon's Reports — More Here.

© Mike Reagan

There are two contradictory interpretations of the events that took place that day and for some reason the the FBI  has been unable to see that both interpretations call the bureau's abilities into question.
capital, capitol, fbi
Saturday, 19 November 2022 04:17 AM
Newsmax Media, Inc.

Sign up for Newsmax’s Daily Newsletter

Receive breaking news and original analysis - sent right to your inbox.

(Optional for Local News)
Privacy: We never share your email address.
Join the Newsmax Community
Read and Post Comments
Please review Community Guidelines before posting a comment.

Newsmax, Moneynews, Newsmax Health, and Independent. American. are registered trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc. Newsmax TV, and Newsmax World are trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc.

America's News Page
© Newsmax Media, Inc.
All Rights Reserved
Download the NewsmaxTV App
Get the NewsmaxTV App for iOS Get the NewsmaxTV App for Android Scan QR code to get the NewsmaxTV App
America's News Page
© Newsmax Media, Inc.
All Rights Reserved