Of course Foocker Tooker is all in .. Tucker Carlson’s wild, baseless theory blaming the FBI for organizing the Jan. 6 Capitol riot
"I have no doubt that this is what underlies your question. The FBI Did It? LOL Understanding MAGA's newest insurrection conspiracy theory."
Some repetition here, still plenty new to make the post to yours.
Trump supporters clash with police and security forces on Jan. 6. (Joseph Prezioso/AFP/Getty Images)
By Aaron Blake Senior reporter June 17, 2021 at 6:36 a.m. GMT+10
It’s been more than five months since President Donald Trump’s supporters stormed the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, and those seeking to deflect blame still can’t figure out exactly how to do so. First, the idea was that the riot was provoked by antifa. Then it was that it was preplanned, so Trump couldn’t have incited it. Then it was that the riots weren’t really that bad or that they were even “peaceful,” despite the violence and deaths. None of those arguments is borne out by the evidence available.
But now we’ve got a new entry in this long-running quest for a conspiracy theory that will stick: That perhaps the riot was actually the work … of the FBI?
Fox News host Tucker Carlson wove just such a tangled, conspiratorial web Tuesday night.
Carlson’s theory is essentially that the presence of unindicted co-conspirators in the Capitol riot indictments means those people are government agents and that this, in turn, means the FBI was involved in organizing the riot .. https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/tucker-carlson-government-agents-helped-organize-capitol-riot . The idea has since caught on with conspiratorially minded congressional Republicans.
There are myriad problems with this. But first, let’s get to the argument.
The theory follows Carlson’s well-established style of asking extremely suggestive questions .. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/03/16/dangerous-game-tucker-carlson-is-playing-vaccines/?itid=lk_inline_manual_10 .. with little basis in evidence — and which are easily disputed — and then treating the answers he likes as fact to build a narrative he prefers. I’ll quote him at-length: - Strangely, some of the key people who participated on Jan. 6 have not been charged. Look at the document. The government calls those people unindicted co-conspirators. What does that mean? Well, it means that in potentially every single case, they were FBI operatives. - Carlson goes on to cite two unindicted co-conspirators in the indictment against alleged Capitol rioter Thomas Caldwell. The government alleges Caldwell conspired with members of the extremist “Oath Keepers .. https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2021/02/09/capitol-riot-oath-keeper-fbi/?itid=lk_inline_manual_12 ” to storm the Capitol. “Person Two” was someone Caldwell stayed with at his hotel. “Person Three” was someone Caldwell identified as being involved in a “quick reaction force.”
nikki mccann ramírez @NikkiMcR
Tucker Carlson's latest take on the Jan. 6th attack on the capitol is that it was actually an FBI false flag VIDEO 10:14 AM · Jun 16, 2021 1.1K 357 ...link to Tweet
Here’s where Carlson gets to the crux of his conspiracy theory: - But wait, here’s the interesting thing: Person Two and Person Three were organizers of the riot. The government knows who they are, but the government has not charged them. Why is that?
You know why: They were almost certainly working for the FBI. So, FBI operatives were organizing the attack on the Capitol on Jan. 6, according to government documents.
And those two are not alone. In all, Revolver News reported there are, quote, “upwards of 20 unindicted co-conspirators in the Oath Keeper indictments, all playing various roles in the conspiracy who have not been charged for virtually the exact same activities, and in some cases, much, much more severe activities as those named alongside them in the indictments.”
Huh? So it turns out that this “white supremacist” insurrection was, again by the government’s own admission in these documents, organized at least in part by government agents. - Carlson goes on to note that FBI Director Christopher A. Wray has said the government has aimed to infiltrate extremist groups like the Oath Keepers, which shouldn’t really be a surprise to anyone.
The second and perhaps most important point is that the basis of Carlson’s theory — that the unindicted co-conspirators are either likely or must be government agents — is extremely shaky.
“There are many reasons why an indictment would reference unindicted co-conspirators, but their status as FBI agents is not one of them,” said Jens David Ohlin, a criminal law professor at Cornell Law School. Added Lisa Kern Griffin of Duke University Law School: “Undercover officers and informants can’t be ‘co-conspirators’ for the purposes of establishing an agreement to violate the law, because they are only pretending to agree to do so. … An unindicted co-conspirator has committed the crime of conspiracy, and investigative agents doing their jobs undercover are not committing crimes.”
Your "Oopsie!"
Among the other possible reasons someone might be listed as an unindicted co-conspirator:
+ The government doesn’t know who they are.
* The government doesn’t have sufficient evidence to indict them and wants to avoid impugning their reputations or compromising ongoing investigations.
* They have secured leniency from the government for cooperation with investigations into others.
In addition, you don’t need to look any further than the Caldwell indictment to see that we should hardly assume the unindicted co-conspirators are government agents.
And there is reason to believe one of the two unidentified co-conspirators Carlson focused on might actually be Caldwell’s wife. Caldwell’s indictment says, “CALDWELL and PERSON TWO took ‘selfie’ photographs of themselves on the balcony and in other areas on the perimeter of the Capitol.” The Washington Post has reported .. https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/fbi-capitol-riot-coordination-planning/2021/01/30/c5ef346e-6258-11eb-9430-e7c77b5b0297_story.html?itid=lk_inline_manual_37 ..... that Caldwell posted images to Facebook while writing, “Us storming the castle. Please share. Sharon is right with me. I am such an instigator!” Caldwell’s wife, who has not been charged with a crime, was not otherwise referenced in his indictment, despite being present near him in the Capitol.
Even if we set aside these reasons to disbelieve Carlson’s theory and the fact that the government isn’t supposed to cite government agents as unindicted co-conspirators, it’s still a massive leap to assume that these people were government agents. Carlson initially raises this as a supposedly likely possibility, but then essentially treats it as fact.
[INSERT: Another weasel troll practice experienced much on TA.]
Is it possible it’s right? Virtually anything is possible. There’s just no genuine reason to believe it, despite Carlson’s presentation.
[As we have repeatedly said to our trolls, we base our latest positions on the best available evidence at any time.]
“Tucker Carlson and Revolver News make a speculative inflammatory leap that may play well with their audiences,” said Ira P. Robbins, a professor at American University’s law school who has studied unindicted co-conspirators .. https://www.fclr.org/fclr/articles/html/2004/fedctslrev1.pdf , “but which may lack any basis in reality.”
Carlson also says that the insurrection was, “by the government’s own admission in these documents, organized at least in part by government agents,” which goes quite a bit further than merely suggesting the possibility that the government had infiltrated the organizations involved. It’s the kind of suggestion journalists in other organizations would quite possibly be fired for if they sought to push it nearly as hard.
But for Carlson, it’s just the latest segment.
Aaron Blake is senior political reporter, writing for The Fix. A Minnesota native, he has alsowritten about politics for the Minneapolis Star Tribune and The Hill newspaper. Twitter
Are Jan. 6 rioters traitors? So far, criminal charges say no
The heading above is another dicey one. The article says the charges are as much convenience as anything, not what the heading suggests.
"The FBI Did It? LOL Understanding MAGA's newest insurrection conspiracy theory."
By MICHAEL TARM yesterday
FILE - In this Jan. 6, 2021 file photo, supporters loyal to then-President Donald Trump, try to break through a police barrier at the Capitol in Washington. Key figures in the Jan. 6 riot on U.S. Capitol spoke about their desire to overthrow the government, but to date, U.S prosecutors have charged no one with sedition. They could still add them. But prosecutors may be reluctant to bring them because of their legal complexity and the difficulty in securing convictions. (AP Photo/Julio Cortez)
CHICAGO (AP) — Plotted to block the certification of Joe Biden’s election victory: Check. Discussed bringing weapons into Washington to aid in the plan: Check. Succeeded with co-insurrectionists, if only temporarily, in stopping Congress from carrying out a vital constitutional duty: Check.
Accusations against Jan. 6 rioter Thomas Caldwell certainly seem to fit the charge of sedition as it’s generally understood — inciting revolt against the government. And the possibility of charging him and others was widely discussed after thousands of pro-Trump supporters assaulted scores of police officers, defaced the U.S. Capitol and hunted for lawmakers to stop the certification. Some called their actions treasonous.
Some legal scholars say that sedition charges could be justified but that prosecutors may be reluctant to bring them because of their legal complexity and the difficulty historically in securing convictions. Overzealousness in applying them going back centuries has also discredited their use. And defense attorneys say discussions of such charges only add to the hyperbole around the events of that day.
The last time U.S. prosecutors brought such a case was in 2010 in an alleged Michigan plot by members of the Hutaree militia to incite an uprising against the government. But a judge ordered acquittals on the sedition conspiracy charges at a 2012 trial, saying prosecutors relied too much on hateful diatribes protected by the First Amendment and didn’t, as required, prove the accused ever had detailed plans for a rebellion.
Among the last successful convictions for seditious conspiracy stemmed from another, now largely forgotten storming of the Capitol in 1954 when four Puerto Rican nationalists opened fire on the House floor, wounding five representatives.
Treason is one of the few crimes specifically defined in the Constitution. It’s defined as “levying war” against the U.S. or “giving aid and comfort” to its enemies. Legal scholars say the Founding Fathers, who were themselves accused of treason by the British, sought to clearly articulate it because they knew the potential to misapply it to legitimate dissent.
In a landmark ruling in 1807, Chief Justice John Marshall wrote that treason required a citizen actually go to war against the United States, not to just brainstorm or draw up plans for it. Even recruiting and training rebels for war, he argued, isn’t treason if war is never engaged.
Among the last treason cases was of American-born Iva Toguri D’Aquino — known as “Tokyo Rose” during World War II for her anti-American broadcasts — convicted in 1949 of “giving aid and comfort” to Japan. President Gerald Ford pardoned her in 1977 after reports U.S. authorities pressured some witnesses to lie.
The only American charged with treason since the World II era was Adam Gadahn, indicted in 2006 for giving “aid and comfort” to al-Qaida. Before he could be tried, he was killed by a U.S. drone strike in Pakistan.
Carlton Larson, a University of California law professor and author of “On Treason: A Citizen’s Guide to the Law,” ruled out treason for the Jan. 6 rioters. But he believes some qualify for a provision of seditious conspiracy on “hindering” the execution of U.S. laws. “I think it easily fits,” he said.
But the memo said the Justice Department believed the statute doesn’t require proof of a plot to overthrow the government and could also be used when a defendant tries to oppose the government’s authority by force.
In the weeks after the Capitol attack, federal prosecutors said they were looking at all possible charges. Washington’s then-acting U.S. Attorney Michael Sherwin .. https://apnews.com/article/arrests-district-of-columbia-crime-b21c12ba136e54f884958015a898937c .. told CBS’ “60 Minutes” on March 17 that prosecutors were mulling seditious conspiracy charges against some rioters.
“I believe the facts do support those charges,” Sherwin said. “And I think that, as we go forward, more facts will support that.”
He had first floated the possibility in January, saying a special group of prosecutors was examining whether they would apply to any rioters. The Justice Department did not respond to questions about what happened to that group, or why no sedition charges were ever brought. And Sherwin’s comments were criticized by a federal judge and defense lawyers who said it was inappropriate to discuss ongoing investigations publicly. He left the Justice Department soon after.
The Justice Department is continuing its work to prosecute a record number of cases. But they have so far opted for comparatively run-of-the-mill charges, like entering a restricted area and obstructing an official proceeding. Caldwell faces those charges, as well as conspiracy, which, like sedition, carries a maximum 20-year prison term. Treason carries a possible death sentence.
He has been charged alongside other members and associates of the far-right Oath Keepers extremist group .. https://apnews.com/article/capitol-siege-us-news-1c81065c39790d6bbafb4ffdc3d2dc1e .. with conspiring to block the vote certification. He later boasted in a message to a friend about grabbing an American flag, joining the crowd that surged toward the Capitol and saying “let’s storm the place and hang the traitors.” The 65-year-old from Virginia told his friend, “If we’d had guns I guarantee we would have killed 100 politicians.”
Defense attorneys say hyperbole has been a hallmark of the Jan. 6 prosecutions.
“If grandiose rhetoric was evidence, the Government’s case would be very strong,” Caldwell’s lawyer, David Fischer, wrote in one filing. He didn’t respond to a message seeking comment.
In filings, Fischer also said prosecutors took his client’s words out of context to falsely accuse an ailing 20-year military veteran. He said Caldwell, like many veterans, was prone to puffery and enjoyed portraying himself in recounting his actions on Jan. 6 as a movie character who picks up a battle flag to lead the charge.
Fischer also asked Caldwell’s Washington judge this month to transfer Caldwell’s case to another city on grounds Sherwin’s comments regarding sedition would prejudice jurors.
On Jan. 5, another rioter, Guy Reffitt, allegedly spoke of “dragging … people out of the Capitol by their ankles” and installing a new government. The 48-year-old Texan came prepared for battle on Jan. 6, carrying a gun and wearing body armor as he pushed through Capitol police lines as officers shot him with rubber bullets, prosecutors said.
Charges against Reffitt include entering a restricted building with a deadly weapon, as well as obstructing justice by threatening his teenage children. The oil industry consultant allegedly told them later in January they’d be traitors if they turned him in. He added, “Traitors get shot.”
In an unapologetic note written from jail and filed with the court in May, Reffitt denied there had ever been a conspiracy, and provided a chilling reason.
“If overthrow (of the government) was the quest,” Reffitt wrote about Jan. 6, “it would have no doubt been overthrown.”
___
Associated Press writers Michael Balsamo in Washington and Alanna Durkin Richer in Boston contributed to this report.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
