The Second Anniversary of January 6th

Will We Ever Know the Full Truth of the Federal Government’s Involvement?

The two-year anniversary of what the Left seems to consider the most dangerous event in human history is upon us, and the Biden administration, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and the corporate media are all too eager to paint political dissidents in this country as domestic terrorists, fascists, and white Christian nationalists. With this comes increased funding, prestige for agents in the field, relevance and reverence, justification for increased surveillance and security measures (a stricter version of the Patriot Act?), control of society, a new profit-driven war on terror, an elimination of political enemies of the state, and the prohibition against certain candidates from seeking office.

Did events occur the way that the corporate media has portrayed them, or was something else going on behind the scenes? Did the FBI allow the desecration of the Left’s sacred symbol of democracy in order to secure its future as an all-important force, or did the agency go even further by instigating the event for political reasons?

While the United States House Select Committee on the January 6th Attack scrapes for any information to bar President Donald Trump from running in 2024 and pertaining to the former president’s throwing of food against a wall and anger at his secret service detail for not allowing him to go to the Capitol, real concerns exist in regards to the FBI’s and the United States Capitol Police’s (USCP) handling of the event. The January 6th Committee’s not-so-independent and biased investigation may be referring the Democratic Party’s political enemy for criminal charges, but does anyone care about examining whether a couple of the nation’s top law enforcement agencies had a hand in conspiring against Trump supporters? As a society, we would not want to do such a thing, especially since we have full faith in our institutions and intelligence systems; and we would never believe that our government could commit another Operation Northwoods or Michigan governor kidnapping entrapment case. The FBI, of course, is pure and blameless.

Did the USCP permit the protesters on January 6th to enter the building by opening the gates? Some video evidence seems to suggest that this is the case, and as someone who has experience in military law enforcement, I can assure you that no agent, who would like to keep his or her job or avoid severe consequences, would permit unauthorized access to a secure location without orders to do so. Even the alleged struggle between the police and protesters struck me as fake or staged (though I cannot prove this), while the cops in the background did nothing and stood around watching the protesters. The QAnon shaman (Jacob Chansley) claimed in a CBS 60 Minutes interview that he had walked through an open door with waving police, and although the judge in the case and the corporate media have painted this claim as a lie, the video evidence provided seems to show that he did walk through the door unhindered (completely separate shots of protesters breaking windows were used as evidence of the “lie,” but it does not appear that Chansley broke any windows or walked in that particular area). All in all, the protesters were able to easily access one of the most important buildings in the country, whether it was a law enforcement and intelligence failure, or they were intentionally given entry.   

Once in the building, some of the protesters seemed to be taking selfies with the agents, and yet, only one rioter was killed (Ashli Babbitt), while other officers and protesters died by suicide, overdose, and cardiovascular issues following the incident (maybe a certain mandated pharmaceutical product assisted in the deaths?). From what we can see of that day, there were some violent clashes (at least according to official sources), but if there was a genuine insurrection transpiring, you would have seen more law enforcement agents on scene (why were there only a few officers defending lawmakers during an important ceremony?) and fire fights with guns drawn (protecting Congressmen and an asset vital to national security would be reason to use deadly force).

Either way, the captured protesters were treated like political prisoners (of course, never-biased PolitiFact and others have been hard at work trying to debunk this claim), and some of them were put in solitary confinement. Special Assistant U.S. Attorney Mona Sedky admitted that although most of the unarmed trespassers were nonviolent, the government needed to make an example of them in order to go along with the narrative that January 6th was an insurrection and that domestic terrorism was the next hot-button issue (if they were being arrested for the purpose of making a point and held in solitary confinement, they were political prisoners). The government has to deter those who would think about committing acts similar to what our founding fathers did, so harsh punishments were needed for such “treason.” So far, 185 people have been convicted of crimes, while over six hundred still await their trials (so much for a speedy trial); and most of the country has been propagandized into despising these simple trespassers (like they were Eastasian or Eurasian prisoners being paraded down the streets of Oceania). There has clearly been political motivation for pushing narratives around January 6th, but what about the FBI’s response?

At a House Homeland Security Committee hearing, Representative Clay Higgins pressed FBI Director Chris Wray about whether there were informants dressed as Trump supporters among the crowd of January 6th protesters, and Wray would not deny that that was the case. He gave a very suspicious answer and seemed to suggest that there were indeed “confidential human sources” working for the FBI on that day, and although this does not prove that the FBI orchestrated the event, it sure does lead to more questions. With this, in conjunction with recent evidence and an acquittal of framed victims during the Michigan governor kidnapping plot, it would be safe to suspect that the FBI did have informants encouraging the protesters to enter the building.

One such man who urged the breaching of the Capitol was someone previously registered on an FBI wanted list: Ray Epps. Shortly before the incident, Epps was removed from the list without arrest, and he was able to freely walk among the protesters (surely the FBI would have known where a high-profile target was located and would have prevented him from getting near important officials). While our trustworthy factcheckers and unbiased January 6th Committee were busy trying to divert attention away from Epps and dispel any claims of FBI involvement, Congressman Thomas Massie asked Attorney General Merrick Garland about FBI assets within the crowds and why Epps was able to insist on protesters going into the Capitol on both January 5th and 6th without facing prosecution (even the crowd thought that Epps was working with the “feds”); and, unsurprisingly, there was no response (you would think that this would have been a good opportunity to quash talk of conspiracy theories). Did the FBI drop their investigation of Epps in exchange for him helping to orchestrate an entrapment case to arrest political dissidents? Though we cannot know with complete confidence that the former Oath Keeper was an FBI informant, it would seem very likely, despite the constant claims by the corporate media that it is just a conspiracy theory. If nothing else, the FBI would have been monitoring Epps and could have stopped him from inciting a breach of the building.

An informant warned the FBI that protesters were planning to storm the Capitol weeks before the incident, and yet, it did nothing in response (was the FBI involved in the planning and recruiting of people for the event?). It is clear that, at the very least, the FBI wanted January 6th to happen (again, for relevance, half of a billion dollars in additional funds, etc.); and as a worst-case scenario, the FBI was directly involved in the plot. Interestingly, the truth-seeking January 6th Committee skipped over law enforcement failures and would not investigate what the FBI knew beforehand. This seems suspicious, and if you wanted to fuel conspiracy theories, this would be exactly the correct course of action. The FBI undoubtedly has something to hide, and it gets even more suspect when looking into the pipe bomb.

The FBI has hidden footage of the pipe bomb suspect, but it is refusing to release it. Could it be that such information would incriminate the FBI in the plot and show that it was a false flag to blame Trump supporters? Still, two years later in an era of modern-day technology and surveillance measures, the suspect remains at large. The government can monitor its own citizens and collect their data, but when a “serious crime” occurs, the agency leaves us hanging with nothing. I wonder why that could be.

In addition, there seems to have been a conspiracy by federal prosecutors to convince the public and judges that Kamala Harris was inside of the Capitol when the riot occurred, but this turned out to be false. Harris did indeed travel to the Democratic National Committee headquarters, but while there, her Secret Service team did not uncover the bomb that had been allegedly placed there on the day prior (on the 5th). USCP Counter-Surveillance Units were dispatched after her arrival, and voila, they magically discovered the bomb and evacuated the senator and vice president-elect, as if it were an intentional production. Could the missing CCTV footage reveal that nobody planted the bomb on January 5th and that it was placed by a government agent on the 6th? It appears more and more so that the FBI and USCP assisted or orchestrated the January 6th insurrection, but if this is the case, the federal government will likely never admit it. For now, we are left piecing together whatever evidence we can find to get to the truth, because the fact checkers and corporate news sources will continue to preach that New Hitler came very close to ending democracy in the United States.

Did Trump incite violence on January 6th? The corporate propaganda pushing the government’s narrative would have you believe this to be the case, but during the chaos, the former president told the protesters to remain peaceful and to go home and respect law enforcement. CNN, MSNBC, and NPR conveniently leave that part out and go about claiming that we must accept all election results, or else democracy is threatened. This is funny because there are several clips of Democratic politicians screaming about how past elections were stolen and rigged against them (most notably Hilary Clinton and Stacey Abrams). The hypocrites live in their own world, but now they are pushing their double standards on the entire nation, as they want to increase domestic terror measures against the dangerous election-denying Republicans.

The DHS has been issuing bulletins suggesting that certain individuals, who were angry by the federal and state governments’ responses to Covid-19 or who denied the 2020 election results, are a danger to the country and democracy. An FBI document revealed that the agency was increasing surveillance of people flying the Gadsden and Betsy Ross flags, advocating for the Second Amendment, and utilizing symbols of the American Revolution. So, now our First, Fourth, and Fifth Amendments are threatened, and we are no longer free to openly express ourselves (or symbols of our founding). Oh, the irony!

As we now know, the DHS, FBI, and White House have been conspiring to censor information pertaining to the pandemic, the Ukraine war, and election integrity; and they have been attempting to bypass the First Amendment by using social media companies (the Left ironically loves to argue that companies are free to censor whatever they want and that the First Amendment does not apply to them). In an era where the federal government is creating a narrative, disseminating propaganda, and classifying unfavorable material as disinformation, we must ask ourselves if censorship and security should trump individual liberty. Americans are so propagandized into believing that Trump is on the same page of evil as Hitler or Osama bin Laden that they will not demand that our own government be held responsible for any role it may have played on January 6th, and no honest corporate source of news will provide adequate information to help us fully understand what transpired. We can either allow the government to prevent the free flow of information and send out secret police to entrap dissidents, or we can stand up for what is rightfully ours. Will we the people create Boston Tea Party-type events, or will we permit the trampling of our rights? The choice is up to us.

Thank you for reading, and please check out my book, The Global Bully, and website.