January 6th, 2021 Flashcards
Trump Fake Elector Plot
The Trump fake electors plot was a key part of efforts to overturn the 2020 U.S. presidential election. After losing the election, Donald Trump, his associates, and Republican officials in seven states created and submitted fraudulent certificates of ascertainment to falsely claim Trump had won those states. The scheme, supported by a fringe legal theory from attorneys Kenneth Chesebro and John Eastman, aimed to have Vice President Mike Pence count these fake electors instead of the legitimate ones, thereby overturning Joe Biden’s victory. Trump, fully aware the plan violated the Electoral Count Act, pressured Republican legislators and the Justice Department to act on baseless claims of election fraud. Rudy Giuliani played a central role in coordinating the scheme across multiple states. Investigations by the January 6 committee and the Justice Department revealed Trump’s involvement, with indictments issued against dozens of Republican officials and Trump associates by mid-2024.
FBI Informants on January 6th - Chat GPT
Yes, there is evidence that FBI informants were present at the U.S. Capitol during the events of January 6, 2021. Court filings and news reports have revealed that the FBI used informants within groups like the Proud Boys and the Oath Keepers to gather intelligence leading up to and during the Capitol breach.
Key points include:
1. Court Filings: During trials of January 6 defendants, defense attorneys disclosed the presence of FBI informants within certain groups. For example, in the Proud Boys trial, it was revealed that multiple confidential human sources (CHSs) were embedded in the organization.
2. Oversight Investigations: The House Judiciary Committee, under Republican leadership, has sought information about the extent of FBI involvement and whether informants played any role in influencing or escalating the events.
3. FBI’s Position: The FBI has not confirmed the full extent of its informant activities but has stated that such operations are standard in monitoring extremist groups and are not intended to incite illegal actions.
While informants were present, there is no definitive evidence that they provoked or led the breach. Their role remains a subject of debate, with critics questioning whether the FBI adequately shared intelligence to prevent the attack.
Informants’ Role:
• FBI informants were embedded in groups like the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers. Their primary purpose was likely to monitor activities and gather intelligence on potential threats. • Some defense attorneys have argued in court that informants may have influenced group actions or strategies, but no direct evidence has proven that informants encouraged illegal activities.
Investigations and Testimonies:
During the trials of January 6 defendants, the presence of informants was revealed. Defense lawyers have occasionally suggested entrapment or undue influence by informants, but judges and prosecutors have largely dismissed these claims due to a lack of evidence.
Testimonies from informants themselves or FBI agents have not indicated that informants incited violence or coordinated the breach.
Public Debate:
Critics of the FBI have speculated that informants could have played a more active role in the events. For instance, some argue that their presence might have emboldened certain participants.
Supporters of the FBI argue that informants are a routine part of counterterrorism and law enforcement operations, and their actions are usually limited to observation and reporting.
While informants were present, there is no verified evidence that they directly escalated or provoked the breach of the Capitol. Much of the speculation around their involvement remains unsupported by concrete findings from official investigations.
The FBI and other law enforcement agencies often embed informants in groups like the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers because these organizations have been associated with extremist ideologies and activities that may pose security threats. Monitoring such groups helps authorities gather intelligence, prevent illegal activities, and protect public safety.
Why Were There Informants?
1. Threat of Violence:
• Both groups have been linked to rhetoric and activities that law enforcement views as potentially violent or seditious. Informants help gather information on planned activities, membership, and leadership structures.
2. Countering Extremism:
• Groups like the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers have been involved in anti-government or militia movements, which federal authorities monitor as potential domestic terrorism threats.
3. Proactive Prevention:
• Informants can provide early warnings about planned illegal activities, enabling law enforcement to intervene before violence occurs or laws are broken.
Concerns About the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers
These groups have been associated with problematic actions and ideologies, leading to law enforcement scrutiny.
The Proud Boys
• Far-Right Nationalism: The group promotes ultranationalist ideologies and has been accused of fostering white supremacist beliefs, although they deny being racist.
• History of Violence: Members have been involved in violent street clashes during protests, particularly against left-wing groups like Antifa.
• Leadership Convictions: Key Proud Boys leaders, including Enrique Tarrio, were convicted for their roles in planning and leading actions on January 6, 2021.
The Oath Keepers
• Anti-Government Ideology: This militia-style group promotes conspiracy theories about government overreach and has a history of stoking fears about martial law and federal oppression.
• Armed Presence: The group has appeared armed at protests and has been accused of intimidating communities under the guise of protecting constitutional rights.
• Seditious Conspiracy Convictions: Oath Keepers’ leader Stewart Rhodes and others were convicted for planning coordinated efforts to disrupt the certification of the 2020 presidential election.
Concerns Raised by Critics
1. Radicalization: Both groups have been accused of radicalizing members by spreading extremist ideologies and conspiracy theories.
2. Destabilizing Actions: Their actions, including armed demonstrations and violent confrontations, have sometimes escalated political tensions.
3. January 6 Involvement: Members of both groups played key roles in the Capitol breach, leading to numerous arrests and convictions.
The FBI has used informants in various groups throughout history as part of its efforts to monitor and counteract threats to national security, public safety, and civil order. These groups have spanned political, ideological, and criminal spectrums, including extremist organizations, political movements, and organized crime.
Notable Groups with FBI Informants
1. Civil Rights and Black Liberation Movements (1960s-1970s)
• Black Panther Party:
The FBI infiltrated the Black Panther Party under its COINTELPRO program, targeting members with surveillance, informants, and disruption efforts. The agency viewed the Panthers as a threat due to their calls for systemic change and their armed self-defense initiatives.
• Example: Informant William O’Neal played a significant role in betraying Fred Hampton, a key leader, leading to Hampton’s assassination in a police raid in 1969.
2. Ku Klux Klan (KKK):
• The FBI placed informants within the KKK to counteract the group’s violent activities, including bombings, lynchings, and voter intimidation.
• Example: FBI informants provided intelligence that helped solve the 1964 murders of civil rights workers Chaney, Goodman, and Schwerner in Mississippi (the “Mississippi Burning” case).
3. Communist Party USA (CPUSA):
• During the Cold War, the FBI extensively monitored the CPUSA, fearing communist infiltration of U.S. institutions. Informants provided information about meetings, membership, and potential espionage.
4. American Indian Movement (AIM):
• The FBI infiltrated AIM during the 1970s, viewing it as a radical threat due to its activism for Indigenous rights and its occupation of sites like Wounded Knee. Critics argue that these efforts were part of broader suppression of Indigenous activism.
5. Organized Crime (1940s-Present):
• The FBI has long used informants to infiltrate organized crime families, such as the Italian-American Mafia.
• Example: Mobster Joe Valachi became an FBI informant in the 1960s, revealing details about the Mafia’s structure and operations, including the existence of the “Cosa Nostra.”
6. Environmental and Animal Rights Groups (1990s-Present):
• Informants have been placed in groups like the Earth Liberation Front (ELF) and Animal Liberation Front (ALF), which the FBI labeled as “eco-terrorists” due to acts of arson and property destruction targeting industries they opposed.
7. Far-Right and Militia Groups (1990s-Present):
• The FBI infiltrated groups like the Aryan Nations, the Michigan Militia, and other anti-government militias, particularly after the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995.
• Example: In the 2020 plot to kidnap Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer, FBI informants were instrumental in uncovering and thwarting the plan.
8. Islamic Extremist Networks (Post-9/11):
• The FBI used informants to monitor and disrupt plots linked to al-Qaeda, ISIS, and other extremist organizations. Critics have sometimes accused the FBI of entrapment in cases involving informants in Muslim communities.
9. Labor Unions (Early 20th Century):
• The FBI monitored labor movements like the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW) during the early 1900s, associating them with anarchist or socialist threats. Informants were used to report on strikes and meetings.
Why It Made Sense in These Cases
• Public Safety: Monitoring groups like the KKK or organized crime directly contributed to reducing violence, solving crimes, or dismantling criminal organizations.
• Counteracting Subversion: During the Cold War, informants in communist groups provided intelligence on suspected espionage activities.
• Preventing Terrorism: Infiltrating extremist networks has thwarted domestic and international terror plots.
• Law Enforcement Insight: Informants helped law enforcement understand the inner workings of clandestine or hostile organizations.
Controversies
While the use of informants has been effective in many cases, it has also led to significant ethical and legal concerns:
• COINTELPRO Abuses: The FBI’s tactics, particularly during the 1960s and 1970s, were criticized for targeting legitimate political activism, sowing distrust, and infringing on civil liberties. • Entrapment Allegations: Some informant operations have been accused of encouraging or provoking criminal activity that might not have occurred otherwise.
The FBI’s use of informants has played a crucial role in countering legitimate threats throughout history. However, the balance between public safety and civil liberties remains a contentious issue, with lessons learned from both successes and abuses.
AP News, December 2024:
Social media users are misrepresenting a report released Thursday by the Justice Department inspector general’s office, falsely claiming that it’s proof the FBI orchestrated the Capitol riot on Jan. 6, 2021.
The watchdog report examined a number of areas, including whether major intelligence failures preceded the riot and whether the FBI in some way provoked the violence. Claims spreading online focus on the report’s finding that 26 FBI informants were in Washington for election-related protests on Jan. 6, including three who had been tasked with traveling to the city to report on others who were potentially planning to attend the events.
Although 17 of those informants either entered the Capitol or a restricted area around the building during the riot, none of the 26 total informants were authorized to do so by the bureau, according to the report. Nor were they authorized to otherwise break the law or encourage others to do so.
Here’s a closer look at the facts.
CLAIM: A December 2024 report released by the Department of Justice’s Office of the Inspector General is proof that the Jan. 6 Capitol riot was a setup by the FBI.
THE FACTS: That’s false. The report found that no undercover FBI employees were at the riot on Jan. 6 and that none of the bureau’s informants were authorized to participate. Informants, also known as confidential human sources, work with the FBI to provide information, but are not on the bureau’s payroll. Undercover agents are employed by the FBI.
According to the report, 26 informants were in Washington on Jan. 6 in connection with the day’s events. FBI field offices only informed the Washington Field Office or FBI headquarters of five informants that were to be in the field on Jan. 6. Of the total 26 informants, four entered the Capitol during the riot and an additional 13 entered a restricted area around the Capitol. But none were authorized to do so by the FBI, nor were they given permission to break other laws or encourage others to do the same. The remaining nine informants did not engage in any illegal activities.
None of the 17 informants who entered the Capitol or surrounding restricted area have been prosecuted, the report says. A footnote states that after reviewing a draft of the report, the U.S. attorney’s office in Washington said that it “generally has not charged those individuals whose only crime on January 6, 2021 was to enter restricted grounds surrounding the Capitol, which has resulted in the Office declining to charge hundreds of individuals; and we have treated the CHSs consistent with this approach.”
The assistant special agent in charge of the Washington Field Office’s counterterrorism division told the inspector general’s office that he “denied a request from an FBI office to have an undercover employee engage in investigative activity on January 6.” He, along with then-Washington Field Office Assistant Director in Charge Steven D’Antuono, said that FBI policy prohibits undercover employees at First Amendment-protected events without investigative authority.
Many social media users drew false conclusions from the report’s findings.
“JANUARY 6th WAS A SETUP!” reads one X post that had received more than 11,400 likes and shares as of Friday. “New inspector general report shows that 26 FBI/DOJ confidential sources were in the crowd on January 6th, and some of them went into the Capitol and restricted areas. Is it a coincidence that Wray put in his resignation notice yesterday? TREASON!”
The mention of Wray’s resignation refers to FBI Director Christopher Wray’s announcement Wednesday that he plans to resign at the end of President Joe Biden’s term in January.
Other users highlighted the fact that there were 26 FBI informants in Washington on Jan. 6, but omitted key information about the findings of the report.
These claims echo a fringe conspiracy theory advanced by some Republicans in Congress that the FBI played a role in instigating the events of Jan. 6, 2021, when rioters determined to overturn Republican Donald Trump’s 2020 election loss to Democrat Joe Biden stormed the Capitol in a violent clash with police. The report knocks that theory down. Wray called such theories “ludicrous” at a congressional hearing last year.
Asked for comment on the false claims spreading online, Stephanie Logan, a spokesperson for the inspector general’s office, pointed The Associated Press to a press release about the report.
In addition to its findings about the the FBI’s involvement on Jan. 6, the report said that the FBI, in an action its now-deputy director described as a “basic step that was missed,” failed to canvass informants across all 56 of its field offices for any relevant intelligence ahead of time. That was a step, the report concluded, “that could have helped the FBI and its law enforcement partners with their preparations in advance of January 6.” However, it did credit the bureau for preparing for the possibility of violence and for trying to identify known “domestic terrorism subjects” who planned to come to Washington that day.
The FBI said in a letter responding to the report that it accepts the inspection general’s recommendation “regarding potential process improvements for future events.”
