Another Conspiracy Theory Bites the Dust
Did last week's testimony by DOJ IG Michael Horowitz finally generate interest from conservative media and Republican lawmakers as to the role of FBI informants in January 6?
Tin foil hat wearers, unite!
As I explained last week, Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz has not yet issued a report on the DOJ’s role in the events of January 6. Horowitz announced on January 15, 2021 that he would conduct the inquiry; the DOJ is the only government agency that hasn’t published the findings of an internal investigation.
Now we know why. Or at least the official excuse.
Horowitz informed the House Weaponization subcommittee on September 25 that he had paused his investigation for an unspecified amount of time so as to not interfere in the department’s “ongoing criminal cases” into January 6. “We reinitiated it last year and I’m in the process of reviewing a draft report,” Horowitz told Representative Thomas Massie (R-Ky) during a hearing on FBI retaliation against whistleblowers.
Setting aside the dubious explanation—the DOJ’s criminal investigation continues to this day with new arrests announced each week—Horowitz used the delay to explain why the report won’t be released before Election Day.
But the legitimate reason why the report will be more than four years in the making represents another example of election interference by the Justice Department. Promoting the false narrative about the “insurrection” and placing blame at the feet of Donald Trump is central to the Democrats’ winning election strategy this year. The Biden/Harris regime and their bootlickers in the corporate media consistently portray suspicions that the federal government played an animating if not lead role in the Capitol protest as the stuff of “conspiracy theories.”
So thanks to Horowitz’s foot dragging, arguably the biggest unanswered question of January 6—how many FBI informants were involved—will remain a mystery until after Americans vote this fall and possibly until after Inauguration Day.
Hints and Clues Amid the Subterfuge
Horowitz, however, did tip his hand in terms of whether his report will address the role of FBI informants. Under further questioning by Massie, Horowitz said he intends to reveal the number of FBI informants, officially known as confidential human sources, on Capitol grounds that day. His report may also disclose expenses paid to informants by the FBI:
Horowitz’s comments finally caught the attention of media outlets and lawmakers who’ve ignored this scandal for nearly four years. During a segment on Fox News, which largely stopped covering January 6 following the departure of Tucker Carlson in April 2023, legal analyst Kerri Kupec called Horowitz’s testimony “the sleeper story of the day.”
Kupec told reporter John Roberts that “so many lawmakers and pundits were decried as crazy for suggesting that there could be confidential human sources involved in January 6th and it looks like there might just have been.”
Roberts responded: “A lot of us were told if you think this you’re crazy, you’re a tin foil hat conspiracy theorist but a lot of it turned out to be true so we’ll see how this goes.”
Perhaps more telling than the coverage at Fox News is the lack of coverage by regime media. Neither the Washington Post, CNN, or MSNBC reported on Horowitz’s testimony; the New York Times, which in a 2022 article confirmed the government’s acknowledgement that at least eight FBI informants were planted inside the Proud Boys, also failed to cover Horowitz’s comments.
Where Ya’ Been, Guys?
GOP leaders in Congress also took note. Calling Horowitz’s testimony about FBI informants an “alarming bit of information,” House Speaker Mike Johnson claimed his office will push for answers. “I'll be requesting classified briefings,” Johnson told Fox News congressional correspondent Chad Pergram after the hearing.
One could commend Johnson for finally speaking out. A classified briefing will likely yield the same non-answers by the FBI that Director Christopher Wray offers in public. But at least such a briefing generates headlines and keep the story alive.
Pergram then posted a lengthy response from Weaponization Subcommittee Chairman James Jordan (R-Ohio):
How [Horowitz] answered Mr. Massie's questions, sounds like there were confidential human sources at the Capitol that day. Sounded like it was plural. Like he said, sources. But the part that bothers me is, does it sound like they're going to be a report on what actually happened? How many? What they were doing. We're not going to have a report…until after the election. This seemed like news that the American people [have] been seeking for almost four years.
Based on Mr. Horowitz's testimony, based on the work the committee has done over the last couple years, looks like there were confidential human sources at the Capitol on January 6, 2021. We want to know what took place. We want to know what they were doing. We want to know all the answers to the key questions, and we'd like that information soon.
While Republican interest in the matter is welcome albeit long overdue, there simply is no question FBI informants were involved before and on January 6. It is well known that the FBI embedded informants in both the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers prior to the events of January 6; some participated in pre-planning meetings as well as the protest itself.
During a transcribed interview with the House Judiciary Committee last year, former Washington FBI chief Steven D’Antuono also appeared to confirm multiple FBI offices sent informants to the nation’s capital for January 6. D’Antuono told House Republicans last year that he asked FBI headquarters to poll all 56 field offices in 2021 to determine how many FBI informants were involved.
FBI whistleblowers have also confirmed the presence of informants as well as the bureau’s attempt to conceal their participation. George Hill, an FBI intelligence analyst out of the Boston FBI field office, told Congress that D’Antuono’s office ordered an investigation into individuals from the Boston area but would not produce video to document any potentially criminal behavior. “There may be…confidential human sources and we need to protect their identities,” Hill said he was told.
Hill also testified that FBI undercover employees may have been involved as well—something supported by former Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund.
Sund believes “multiple” FBI undercover agents tracked suspected “domestic terrorists” in the city that day. Sund told Tucker Carlson in an August 2023 interview that deploying FBI undercover employees, which are different from informants, represented “regular standard police work.” Sund, however, expressed concern the bureau did not share any information with his office about the use of FBI informants or undercover agents.
None of this passes the smell test. And it never did. Which is why it’s long past time for Republican leaders in Congress to pressure the inspector general to release his report immediately.
If the report is in draft form as Horowitz stated, Republicans must demand an immediate classification review and instruct Attorney General Merrick Garland to post the report by November 1. All demands will be ignored but that should not stop Congressional leaders from doing so. If anything, it will make it harder for the rest of the GOP in Washington—and the regime media—to keep ignoring this major scandal.
Thanks for being on top of this, Julie. I wonder if we'll finally discover Ray Epps' real purpose and role in J6 from the Horowitz "report," which I still doubt we will ever see.
....Never bought into any of this bs on J6,it, like Covid-19 scamdemic,just a distraction to hide a stolen election by Uni-Party in the DC swamp.................fear,suppression and control.