Hot off falsely claiming Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick was bludgeoned to death by “insurrectionists” on January 6, 2021, Representative Mondaire Jones (D-N.Y.) last week identified another faux victim of Trump supporters: Ray Epps.
The infamous red-hatted man seen on video numerous times urging people to “go into the Capitol” remains free despite engaging in conduct far more disruptive than many who face charges for their behavior that day. Jones, however, describes Epps as a “scapegoat” and “bogeyman” of his Republican colleagues; commended Epps for turning himself into the FBI (as did many protesters later charged with crimes); and claimed Epps tried to calm the crowd as the chaos unfolded.
“There is nothing unusual about a guy who didn’t actually go into the Capitol on January 6 and who did not actually incite violence not being indicted,” Jones said during last week’s House Judiciary Committee meeting to debate a bill demanding that the Department of Justice turn over all records related to Epps. “Mr. Epps and his wife have had their lives threatened. And they’ve had to go into hiding because of this latest conspiracy theory by MAGA Republicans to distract from the existential threat that Donald Trump and the Republican Party pose to our democracy.”
Jones was the latest member of Congress to come to Epps’ rescue, an inexplicable defense of someone who took part in what the Biden regime considers an act of terror comparable to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 that left nearly 3,000 people dead. Despite promises by the January 6 select committee that Epps’ sworn interview would be released to the public, his testimony remains under wraps nearly nine months later.
Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), a member of the committee, called unanswered questions about Epps a “conspiracy theory” and begged Republicans to leave Epps alone. “He’s just trying to survive and he’s on your side!” Raskin yelled during the same House Judiciary committee meeting. Claiming without evidence that Republicans “don’t have many voters left,” Raskin suggested Republicans should stop “vilifying” Epps, an alleged Trump supporter.
So everyone else is an insurrectionist and terrorist but Ray Epps is just a “schmuck?”
Weird.
In fact Epps is one of many instigators caught on film who somehow still manages to evade brutal FBI raids and bogus charges just as the Justice Department closes in on 1,000 total January 6 defendants with new arrests announced each week. And prosecutors are attempting to conceal information about other individuals tied to the events of that day—FBI informants embedded in the Oath Keepers, the so-called militia group accused of attempting to overthrow the government on January 6.
In a last-minute motion filed by prosecutors last week, six days shy of the start of the Oath Keepers first trial, the Justice Department asked D.C. District Court Judge Amit Mehta for a protective order to prevent defense attorneys from asking questions about the role of several “confidential human sources,” i.e., informants, “who were either involved in the investigation that led to prosecution of the defendants, or who became CHSes subsequent to the initiation of the instant investigation.” (This suggests the FBI ran informants into the group prior to January 6.)
Prosecutors say the defense attorneys representing five Oath Keepers charged with seditious conspiracy and other offenses should be prohibited from asking any FBI informant for personal identifying information or about their participation in past or pending investigations. Cross examination of any FBI informant called as a government witness should exclude seeking details about his cooperation with other “undercover operations” managed by the bureau, they argue.
This is the first time the Justice Department has acknowledged the use of FBI informants in the Oath Keepers investigation, which now tracks a similar pattern uncovered in the FBI-hatched plot to kidnap and assassinate Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer. Dozens of FBI supervising agents, informants, and undercover agents operating out of multiple FBI field offices engineered the hoax in an attempt to demonstrate the nonexistent danger posed by “militia groups” loyal to Donald Trump. The ruse even involved the “storming” of the Michigan Capitol building in April 2020.
Six men were arrested in October 2020 for conspiring to kidnap Whitmer but court filings later detailed an elaborate FBI entrapment scheme. A Grand Rapids jury in April acquitted two men after defense counsel successfully argued their clients were set up by the FBI even though the judge withheld from jurors a trove of evidence related to the FBI assets’ animating involvement. The jury could not reach a verdict on two other defendants. (Two men pleaded guilty and cooperated with the government.) In August, a separate jury found the remaining defendants guilty in a retrial thanks to an activist judge heavily tipping the scales in favor of the government.
That outcome, however, does not change the machinations behind the Whitmer fednapping scheme; the Oath Keepers case could unravel in much the same way. Are prosecutors attempting to conceal an informant’s work in the Whitmer scandal by seeking to stop defense attorneys from asking about “past” investigations? Why all the subterfuge?
But background information about FBI informants isn’t the only unknown in the Oath Keepers case. As I reported last week, the creator of an encrypted group chat, another tactic deployed by FBI assets in the Whitmer fednapping to create incriminating evidence, remains unidentified. Although the anonymous chat leader repeatedly encouraged participants to engage in violent conduct on January 6, including killing police and lawmakers in self-defense if necessary, he does not face charges but clips of the conversation will be introduced as government evidence.
Defense attorneys previously informed the court that at least “20 FBI and ATF assets were embedded around the Capitol” on January 6 without explanation. Discovery evidence also showed “the Oath Keepers were being monitored and recorded prior to J6 (sic),” defense lawyers wrote in an April 2022 motion.
And as more whistleblowers emerge from the bureau, at least one recently disclosed that counterterrorism probes targeting “white supremacists” or “domestic violent extremists” are almost always entrapment operations run by the feds.
Which could be one reason why congressional Democrats are so touchy about Ray Epps and why they, along with the Justice Department, refuse to disclose what they know about him. Is it because there really is an innocent explanation as to why he’s uncharged or is it that they know he’s the tip of the iceberg?
And why won’t top FBI officials say whether any FBI assets provoked or engaged in violent conduct on January 6? Why has the January 6 select committee failed to publicly scrutinize what the FBI did before or on January 6; in fact, it’s unclear whether congressional investigators have even interviewed FBI Director Christopher Wray.
Prosecutors and House Democrats portray themselves as purveyors of the facts when in reality they act as cover-up artists for the undercover operatives. Let’s hope the Oath Keepers trial, as it did in the trial of the Whitmer fednapping victims, gets the public closer to the actual truth about January 6.