What may have happened is that the FBI may have gotten a few people in some groups to become informants using the old FBI expedient of threatening to prosecute a member of a group, say on drug charges, unless the member becomes an informant.
Said members who are victims of this ploy then become agents procateur in order to deflect suspicion anyone else in the group may have that they are in actuality rats and snitches.
If so, the FBI plan backfired because the Capitol Police were unable to secure the Capitol and to the chagrin of the FBI lots of people made it into the Capitol.
Now the FBI was in the awkward position, possibly, of needing the testimony of these informants while not indicting them because indicting them would lead to the instigators unraveling the whole FBI plot.
The key point here, according to this theory, is that these unindicted co-conspirators were not agents, did not receive a salary from the FBI, and remained full members of their respective groups.
If this theory is wrong, then whoever says it's wrong has to deal with the question the video above mostly skirted: why are these people unindicted? Because they chose to cooperate with the FBI after the fact, as was alluded to towards the end of the video? That's not a very good explanation of why they are unindicted, which is maybe why this suggestion was deemphasized in the video.
The reason it's not a good answer is because after the fact informants in this situation have knowledge that is mostly redundant. The FBI can build their case without them.
Well, just like 9/11 and the CIA, they find themselves in a difficult position. 1) If they knew about it and did nothing to head it off, they're incompetent. 2) If they didn't know about it, how were they doing their jobs?
What may have happened is that the FBI may have gotten a few people in some groups to become informants using the old FBI expedient of threatening to prosecute a member of a group, say on drug charges, unless the member becomes an informant.
ReplyDeleteSaid members who are victims of this ploy then become agents procateur in order to deflect suspicion anyone else in the group may have that they are in actuality rats and snitches.
If so, the FBI plan backfired because the Capitol Police were unable to secure the Capitol and to the chagrin of the FBI lots of people made it into the Capitol.
Now the FBI was in the awkward position, possibly, of needing the testimony of these informants while not indicting them because indicting them would lead to the instigators unraveling the whole FBI plot.
The key point here, according to this theory, is that these unindicted co-conspirators were not agents, did not receive a salary from the FBI, and remained full members of their respective groups.
If this theory is wrong, then whoever says it's wrong has to deal with the question the video above mostly skirted: why are these people unindicted? Because they chose to cooperate with the FBI after the fact, as was alluded to towards the end of the video? That's not a very good explanation of why they are unindicted, which is maybe why this suggestion was deemphasized in the video.
The reason it's not a good answer is because after the fact informants in this situation have knowledge that is mostly redundant. The FBI can build their case without them.
Well, just like 9/11 and the CIA, they find themselves in a difficult position.
ReplyDelete1) If they knew about it and did nothing to head it off, they're incompetent.
2) If they didn't know about it, how were they doing their jobs?