From ‘Lucky Neighbor’ to Unreliable Witness

Recently released FBI records show numerous inconsistencies by Karlin Younger, the law enforcement-tied individual who allegedly 'found' a pipe bomb near the Republican National Committee on January 6

A photo of the pipe bomb outside the RNC on Jan 6

A grand jury, according to recent reports, will be empaneled early next year in the southern district of Florida to consider a “grand conspiracy” case against those accused of using government power in a decade-long crusade aimed at destroying Donald Trump and the MAGA movement.

The origin of the conspiracy dates back to the days of the Russiagate scandal—but of equal, arguably greater, importance are the events surrounding Jan. 6, 2021. While Russiagate undoubtedly inflicted tremendous damage on the first Trump presidency, it is clear that the purpose of Jan. 6 was to put Trump in prison and use the label “insurrection” as a way to prohibit him from ever again occupying public office.

The scheme almost succeeded, which is why it remains imperative to expose the full truth about every detail of that day’s events. And as the five-year anniversary of Jan 6 approaches, the window of opportunity to bring charges against many perpetrators before the statute of limitations kicks in is closing.

Two factors were central to ensuring the intended chaos at the Capitol that day: the delayed deployment of the National Guard and the “discovery” of two pipe bombs outside the headquarters of the Democratic National Committee and Republican National Committee. Both devices were found right before (RNC) and right after (DNC) the joint session of Congress convened at 1 p.m. to debate the outcome of the 2020 election and certify Joe Biden as the winner.

News that explosives were found just blocks from the U.S. Capitol prompted the first wave of evacuations of nearby congressional office buildings that afternoon and resulted in an air of panic in early media coverage. At a press conference a few days later, top law enforcement officials insisted the devices were “viable” and “deadly” and that felony murder charges could await the person(s) responsible.

The FBI immediately released a photo of a hoodie-clad individual carrying a backpack and wearing a face mask. Authorities later published a grainy video showing that same suspect meandering around Capitol Hill between 7:30 and 8:30 p.m. on Jan. 5, the time the FBI believes the devices were planted. (Last week, the FBI issued another plea for help identifying the individual in the video and offered a $500,000 reward.)

Ever since the story was first reported, however, the official pipe bomb narrative has been unraveling, raising new questions in the process. (Major props to Revolver News for its vital investigative work into the inconsistencies of the pipe bomber story.)

How, for example, did bomb sniffing canines miss the device outside the DNC on at least two occasions? Why did Kamala Harris, at the time a sitting U.S. Senator and incoming vice president, leave the Capitol and go to the DNC headquarters that historic afternoon? How did police officers from multiple agencies and dozens of pedestrians fail to notice the device purportedly sitting between two benches outside the main entrance of the DNC for 17 hours?

While much of the attention has focused on the DNC device, the circumstances of the discovery at the RNC are even more suspicious. And documents recently released by the Select Subcommittee on January 6th should be of great interest to Congress and the FBI. These relate to the woman who “found” the pipe bomb at the RNC: Karlin Younger, the self-described “lucky” neighbor heralded as a hero by the media in the weeks following Jan. 6 but then quickly, and inexplicably, disappeared from law enforcement’s radar.

The Routine ‘Laundry Break’

At the time of the incident, Younger was employed by FirstNet, an independent agency within the Department of Commerce that manages a dedicated broadband network for first responders during major events or disasters; her ties to FirstNet raise additional suspicions, which will be covered in a follow up piece.

Younger had two known contacts with the FBI; she emailed the FBI tip line on Jan. 8, the day after the bureau issued a bulletin with a photo of the suspect, to identify herself as the individual who had discovered the RNC bomb and then sat with FBI agents for an interview on Jan. 11.

On both occasions, Younger said she was working remotely from her apartment and took a break “at approximately 12:00 pm…to eat lunch and do her laundry.”

In interviews conducted just hours after she met with FBI investigators, Younger repeated that line about having lunch and doing laundry. An odd aspect of her behavior, however, was that all subsequent interviews were given strictly to news outlets in her home state of Wisconsin. (The City of Madison, where she grew up and attended college, honored Younger on Feb. 1, 2021, claiming her “swift action prevented further injuries and deaths on that terrible day.”)

Surveillance footage corroborates Younger’s laundry-oriented story. She left her apartment at exactly noon, carrying what appears to be a laundry bag, and entered the alley between the RNC and Capitol Hill Club to use a nearby communal, but isolated, laundry room. At 12:03 p.m., she re-emerged and returned to her apartment by approximately 12:04 p.m. This marked her first full trip to and from the alley—during which, she said, she began her first load of laundry.

But Younger told two different stories as to why she went back to the laundry room shortly before 12:40 p.m.—20 minutes before the historic proceedings at the Capitol just a few blocks away got underway.

Younger told reporters she returned to the laundry room to put her first load of clothes into the dryer:

• “When I went downstairs to put the first load into the dryer, that’s when something caught my eye,” Younger told Channel 3000.

• The Milwaukee Journal reported, “On her way from switching her clothes from the washer to the dryer, she saw something on the ground.”

• “I was doing a now-infamous load of laundry,” she told WISN, “just changing it over from the washer to the dryer.”

She also offered a perfect, one might say law enforcement-type, description of the device despite only having seen it for a few seconds:

But that’s not what she had told FBI investigators about why she returned to the laundry room. “On her way back to the laundry room with a second load of laundry at approximately 12:40 am (sic), [Younger] observed a suspicious device next to the exterior gate,” the FBI’s 302 form of her interview reads.

CCTV footage, however, appears to contradict what she told authorities about her return trip. Video shows Younger exiting her apartment empty-handed at 12:33 p.m.—the same trip she described to them as beginning “with a second load” in hand. She entered the alley at 12:34 and, minutes later, at 12:38, re-emerged running toward the front of the Capitol Hill Club—apparently after having just discovered the bomb.

So, why did Younger tell a different story to reporters within hours of her interview with the FBI? The subheadline for the Jan. 12 Madison Magazine piece on Younger noted that, “After the FBI interviewed Madison native Karlin Younger about discovering the pipe bomb, so did [reporter] Doug Moe.” Younger told the reporter that she “went back out to put her clothes in the dryer.”

One might be inclined to write off these inconsistencies as a minor, fog-of-war oversight, a distraught woman befuddled by being at the center of such a momentous, and potentially deadly, incident. (Younger’s demeanor in interviews, strangely, does not indicate anything like this, however, nor does it suggest the severity of the situation in which she found herself.) But her laundry story is not the only inconsistency in Younger’s account of what happened that day.

The ‘Suspicious Woman’

Younger’s interactions with the FBI did more than just describe her role in discovering the device; Younger also attempted to blame a “suspicious” woman—intimating at one point the woman was a Trump supporter—she allegedly encountered in front of the Capitol Hill Club. And she couldn’t keep that story straight, either.

In her Jan. 8 online tip to the FBI, Younger claimed she was “passed by a woman in front of the Capitol Hill Club who stared at me suspiciously, in such a way that now makes me think maybe she had some knowledge of what was in the alleyway.” She then described the woman in detail: “From what I remember, she was Caucasian, middle-aged (45-55?), of shorter stature (5’4”-5’6”?), heavier set (180-220lbs?), with long dark hair and without a mask. She was wearing a dark or black jacket and jeans.”

But just like her laundry-trip story, her description of this brief encounter changed a few days later.

Younger told investigators on Jan. 11 that she had not seen anyone “suspicious” on Jan. 6. She did, however, tell the FBI that she “noticed an unknown woman in front of the CHC who looked like she was from out of town and looking at [Younger] in a way she considered strange.” Younger continued. “The woman appeared to be approximately 40-50 years old, 5’7”, and heavier set; wearing jeans, a motorcycle type jacket, and was not wearing a mask.” (Her description of a woman of “shorter stature” was suddenly gone and coincidentally replaced with the exact height of the hoodie-clad suspect.)

Younger further claimed the woman “had the same excited energy as some of the other protesters.”

Surveillance video, however, contradicts her allegations about a “suspicious” woman. At no point—whether walking to or from the alley—did Younger pass anyone matching either description she provided in her written tip on Jan. 8 or her interview on Jan. 11.

During her first trip at noon, no one was standing in front of the Capitol Hill Club as Younger headed toward the alley. On her way back to her apartment at 12:04 p.m., she did pass one person in front of the building—but at that point she was no longer walking toward the alley. That individual was standing with his or her back to Younger, facing the building, and made no movement suggesting he or she turned or looked toward her.

At 12:34 p.m., as she passed the Capitol Hill Club again on her way back to the alley—moments before discovering the device—no one matching Younger’s description was in front of the building. Instead, security footage shows her passing an individual, possibly a woman, as she rounded the corner just before the building. This person appeared to be wearing a baseball cap, scarf, and long camel-colored trench coat—not a “dark or black jacket,” nor a “motorcycle-type jacket,” as Younger described.

CCTV image capture showing Younger (circled) passing an individual near the Capitol Hill Club at 12:34 p.m.

Another individual also entered her line of sight during this same sequence, approached the building while pushing what appeared to be a dolly or cart, then opened the front door and walked straight inside.

Contradictions—Then a Real Bombshell

Younger also appears to be the only individual with direct knowledge of events who disputes the FBI’s timeline as to when the RNC device was planted. “I can confirm that the device must have been placed between 12 p.m. and 12:40 p.m. It was not present when I went down to the area to start laundry (~12 p.m.),” she wrote in her online tip.

That is quite an assessment—and flies directly in the face of the nearly five-year claim by law enforcement that both explosives were placed on the night of Jan 5. So, why did Younger make such a definitive statement about when she believed the device was planted? Further, why did she fail to tell investigators the same during her interview on Jan 11?

After all, the only person known to have been in that specific area between noon and 12:40 p.m. was—Karlin Younger.

It is unclear why Younger’s bombshell disclosure has been concealed for years or whether the FBI ever followed up with her about the numerous inconsistencies embedded throughout her account. Each discrepancy—the empty-handed “second load,” the vanishing “suspicious woman,” and the timeline that narrows squarely around her own movements—undermines the only eyewitness account on which the FBI’s chronology still depends.

Whether by error, embellishment, or design, the story of the RNC bomb begins and ends with Karlin Younger. And what followed didn’t just challenge her credibility—it dismantled it entirely, beginning with the single most important detail in her story: the timer on the device that Younger claimed was set to coincide with the start of the joint session of Congress on January 6.