Never said you did…but that’s the thread topic…

Yes, there is a hoop in front of me.

And yes, I’m jumping through it.

Seeing as how the head of the Proud Boys turned out to be an informant… no.

Carlson is claiming that the FBI helped to organize the Capitol attack based on the presence of unindicited people in the court filings. That is his only evidence.

It is weak and unhinged.

1 Like

If you want to totally ignore the history of the FBI that’s up to you. If they have people embedded in those groups and those groups pre-planned the break in, doesn’t seem impossible to me. The FBI had a hand in plotting Whitmers kidnapping, only difference is, that plot wasn’t allowed to come to fruition.

4 Likes

If this is the same thing… then why would the FBI allow the Capitol attack to proceed?

I don’t see anyone here saying it’s impossible. But where’s the evidence? Carlson didn’t present any.

FBI agents infiltrating groups that may pose a threat does not mean they had a hand in plotting their activities…

Being the target kind of gets people a little more motivated to look under the hood.

1 Like

They admit to their informant training the Michigan militia to kidnap the governor, but I suppose now training for is somehow not having a hand in.

4 Likes

Who’s to say that wasn’t their intent?

I can agree he didn’t present any.

You have a link for this?

What I’ve understood is that agents participated in training sessions(they are undercover)… not that the FBI was training them in order to kidnap the Governor…huge diff

This isn’t accurate. The informant did not train them. The informant was an Army veteran and firearms instructor who joined the group on Facebook. He was then concerned with violence against officers and politicians and contacted the police who then contacted the FBI. He originally rejected working with the FBI before agreeing.

2 Likes

especially if they planned it

1 Like

who said i said it should be believed?

Entitled schmucks in bow ties never lie.

2 Likes

because they are not officers and they are not being hidden.

“co-conspirator” or “co-conspirator 2” or “person 3” are generic terms that prosecutors use. But they cannot be used for an FBI agent or informants since federal law prohibits a person acting on behalf of the FBI being legally liable for conspiracy.

Co-conspirator 1 could mean that it is a person who they believe is part of the conspiracy and they don’t want to tip that person off, or they simply do not have enough evidence to charge that person.

who killed babbit?

1 Like

that has nothing to do with the OP and Tuckers claims. Deflect away.

FYI, here is a clip from Carlson’s interview.

Here is a link to the full interview: