PSB Vindicated Again: NYT Admits Feds Had Informants in Proud Boys Present on January 6

PSB Vindicated Again: NYT Admits Feds Had Informants in Proud Boys Present on January 6

September 25, 2021 — Another day, another vindication of Patriots’ Soapbox reporting. This time it comes from the New York Times who today published an article that admitted the FBI had several informants in the Proud Boys that were keeping their handlers informed throughout the riot at the Capitol. As longtime readers know, I filed FOIA requests in March of 2021 trying to gain information about FBI informants present that day specifically embedded within groups like the Oath keepers, Proud Boys, and Three Percenters.

How We Got Here: A Look Back at Our Prior Reporting

In May I published this article:

Former Civilian Military Intelligence Officer James Scaminaci III has created a timeline breakdown of the events of January 6, 2021 at the U.S. Capitol and has come to some interesting findings. Joining our friend Steven, aka Recluse of the VISUP blog and The Farm Podcast, Mr. Scaminaci looks at the events leading up to and on January 6 from the lens of a former Military Intelligence Officer. As such, he is trained to look for the things that no one wants you to see and he provides a very interesting assessment.

He believes that were it not for the presence of Oath Keepers and Proud Boys that day, January 6 would have gone like most other Trump rallies or events with the MAGA crowd yelling at some police officers and waving their flags and then going home. – PSB

Mr. Scaminaci thought those two groups were there for a reason, to try to incite the crowd.

Earlier that year, in March of 2021 I published an article that described how two Proud Boys leaders were in fact FBI informants:

To anyone who has been paying attention in recent years to the excesses of the FBI, it should come as no surprise that yet another Proud Boys leader has been exposed as an FBI informant. Joe Biggs has admitted to working as an FBI informant, the implications of which appear to be lost on Kyle Cheney of Politico who reports about the disclosure. 

Recall that Enrique Tarrio, the leader of the Proud Boys, pictured above with Joe Biggs, was also a “prolific” FBI informant. – PSB

In that article I asserted that the Proud Boys group was created as Fed-run controlled opposition, either from the beginning or shortly after the founding of the group.

In July of 2021, I published an article entitled “FBI Infiltration: Connections Between the “Whitmer Kidnap Plot” and the Events of January 6” exposing even more FBI infiltration of right wing militia groups:

A recent article published by Buzzfeed News was surprisingly informative about the Federal government’s role in the so-called Gov. Gretchen “Whitmer kidnapping plot” that the FBI claims to have foiled. The article flat out states the FBI was involved in the plot from start to finish. There are some incredible and startling admissions in the article. For months now, I have been drawing parallels between that case and the events of January 6 at the U.S. Capitol, asking questions about deeply embedded FBI agents within the main militias present that day. In adjudicating the Michigan case, the Department of Justice itself has tied the cases together in their own words using the events of January 6 to bolster the case. – PSB

This case exposed about 12 FBI informants and two undercover agents involved in that case. It also exposed a nationwide six-hour “militia meeting,” called in the summer of 2020 at the behest of the FBI who had informants present recording throughout. This demonstrates that in advance of January 6 the FBI had deeply embedded informants inside militia groups like the Three Percenters.

On July 6 I reported on a little known case of a man named Fi Duong, exposing that on January 6, not only were undercover FBI present, but also DC Metropolitan Police Department operatives, undercover as well.

Way back on March 15, 2021 Patriots’ Soapbox filed a FOIA request with the FBI, DOJ & DHS related to the use of federal informants on January 6. We believed that like many other FBI entrapment schemes, the main events on January 6 at the Capitol Building in Washington DC, were possibly instigated at the behest of the FBI. The second part of that FOIA request inquired about third party contractors also present that day on behalf of a federal agency. We filed FOIAs on the Oathkeepers and Stewart Rhodes, in addition to publishing an article back in April of this year questioning whether Rhodes was himself a federal informant like several leaders of the Proud Boys turned out to be. Darren Beatie’s June story in Revolver News subsequently did an excellent expose asking the same thing about the use of federal informants on January 6.

The investigative reporting of Patriots’ Soapbox and Revolver News appears to have been vindicated with today’s major bombshells coming from official court documents in a case against a man named Fi Duong. Documents show that not only were there undercover FBI informants present on January 6, but there were also undercover DC Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) undercovers as well,  both working with the FBI. – PSB

It was at this point that it became difficult either to ignore or dismiss the presence of the federal government on January 6. Despite the stream of emerging evidence indicating FBI involvement, mainstream media continued to dismiss, mock and proclaim it was a “conspiracy theory” to suggest that the FBI could have been involved.

Huffington Post reporter Ryan Reilly, despite reporting on the fact, tried to insist this was a one-off thing.

In August of 2021 I reported on even more critical information coming out about the Whitmer Kidnap hoax:

The so-called “Whitmer Kidnapping Plot” has been unfolding for a long time now. Thousands of pages of documents have been filed and countless exhibits produced. Over this period of time, I have reported extensively on this case in prior articles but for those of you who are not familiar with the case, see the following Part IPart IIPart IIIPart IV of our reporting on this case.

In a brief summary of our reporting, it has come out that 12 out of the 18 individuals involved in the so-called “plot” were FBI informants as well as two undercover FBI agents. From the evidence, it appears that the FBI drove the entire “plot” from start to finish. Text messages from the FBI handlers reveal that they directed the main informant, who happened to be second in command of the group, to “draw” specific people into the plot. That handling agent then directed the informants to “delete these texts” which is obstruction of justice.

Buzzfeed reported that Dan, aka CHS-2, was involved with every aspect of the plot from start to finish. A prosecutor working this case was “reassigned” due to ethics concerns and an investigation being conducted into misconduct with informants in a prior case. The main FBI agent overseeing the operation, Richard J. Trask was later arrested for attempting to kill his wife, beating her senseless after a “swingers” party. The FBI handlers told their informants that the mission was to “kill the governor”. – PSB

The facts in this case, and the conduct of the FBI handling agents should raise serious questions about their potential involvement on the 6th.

If that weren’t enough, a few days later on August 23rd, I reported yet more FBI involvement in right wing extremist groups “FBI & U.S. Military Tied to Funding & Training Satanic Neo-Nazi Pedophile Death Cult” this time involving the Attomwaffen and the O9A:

In a case eerily similar to the FBI and “former military” involvement in the “Whitmer Kidnapping Plot”, Court Documents Expose Fed involvement in funding, training and manufacturing a domestic terror organization.

August 23, 2021 – Recent court documents have exposed FBI involvement in manufacturing yet another “far right” domestic terror organization in what appears to be a major COINTELPRO initiative to create a panic about right wing white supremacist groups in the United States. Anyone familiar with my writing and my shows the past few years, knows I have been investigating online extremism and radicalization in conservative groups. I have been monitoring attempts to steer Orthodox Christians into occultism and I have been reporting on FBI infiltration of right wing groups.

These currents began to dovetail and it became increasingly obvious there was a connection between the uptick in both. Unfortunately this has recently been confirmed in several cases and extensively documented in the case of the so-called “Whitmer kidnapping plot.” Court documents have exposed massive FBI infiltration and presence in the Wolverine Watchman Militia and confirmed the FBI was deeply embedded in militia groups like the Three Percenters.

It was revealed that more than a dozen FBI informants and at least two undercover FBI agents were involved in the Michigan “militia” group. Dan, aka CHS-2 was former military and infiltrated the group through a Facebook group, and rose to become second in command of the Watchmen militia, involved in every aspect of the “kidnapping plot.” It was through Dan, a veteran with U.S. Military training and experience, that the Watchmen went from a mostly online edgelord group to a real militia receiving tactical paramilitary training led by Dan. (In case ‘edgelord’ stumps you, “an edgelord is someone on an internet forum who deliberately talks about controversial, offensive, taboo, or nihilistic subjects in order to shock other users in an effort to appear cool, or edgy.”)

We see that same pattern repeating itself with groups like Atomwaffen Division (AWD), the Order of Nine Angles (O9A), Tempel ov Blood and more. Just as the FBI did to vulnerable young Muslim men after 9/11, the FBI targeted young, impressionable, indigent, homeless and mentally unstable men and radicalized them through drugs and brainwashing techniques. This is a major scandal and the FBI must be called to account for its funding of groups now tied to murders. – PSB

This incredible and disturbing pattern of conduct on behalf of the federal government, infiltrating and steering right wing groups into domestic terror activity, and entrapping an indigent and impressionable or mentally ill young man, leads us to where we are today.

Today’s Stunning Admission from the New York Times Hints at More Evidence to Come

The New York Times is well known for its complicity in laundering of government narratives. The most prominent recent example of this colluding practice is the Times’ very impactful laundering of the Fed’s Crossfire Hurricane Trump-Russia hoax to the public. The story that the Times published today is most likely an attempt by the FBI to pre-empt more evidence coming to light about their involvement in these groups. It’s an attempt to get ahead of the story and put out their side first.

The confidential documents the Times cites here were in fact given to them by the FBI. Why would they do this, you might ask? Because this information was going to come out through the court process and via Discovery. This allows them to put their spin on things first.

Indeed, other reporters and I for months have continued to point to PERSON ONE or unindicted co-conspirators as evidence of Fed involvement in the events of that day. Why is it that the main people leading the charge that day were not charged?

HillReporter.com’s Tara Dublin, wrote in July:

Federal prosecutors have described how an encrypted messaging channel named ‘Boots on the Ground’ was created for Proud Boys communications in Washington DC on January 6th that grew to include more than 60 users, including an individual identified by the government as ‘Unindicted Co-Conspirator 1.’  The unindicted co-conspirator seems to speak with authority in a message to ‘Boots on the Ground’ and to a separate ‘New MOSD’ channel on the evening of January 5th, which came a day after Enrique Tarrio, the organization’s national chairman, was arrested on charges of property destruction and banned from DC.

That unindicted co-conspirator involved in the Proud Boys’ planning that led to the siege of the US Capitol has now been identified as Aaron Whallon-Wolkind, the former vice president of the nationalistic pro-Trump street gang’s Philadelphia chapter. His identity as the unindicted co-conspirator was first reported by Alan Feuer, a reporter for the New York Times.

‘Stand by for the shared baofeng channel and shared zello channel, no Colors, be decentralized and use good judgement until further orders,’ the unindicted co-conspirator wrote at 9:09 p.m. on January 5th, according to the government. ‘Rufio is in charge, cops are the primary threat, don’t get caught by them or BLM, don’t get drunk until off the street.’ ‘Rufio’ is the nickname for Ethan Nordean, a Washington State member who faces conspiracy charges as part of a quartet of Proud Boy leaders that also includes Zachary Rehl, who is the president of the Philadelphia chapter, along with Joseph Biggs and Charles Donohoe.

Whallon-Wolkind was also identified as a high-profile user of the right-wing app Telegram with the screen name ‘Aaron PB.’ He wrote to another user named ‘Zack Pb’ in January 2019: ‘I know, another chat, but this one is for info we want to send our FBI contact. Specifically, he wants things we can tie to criminal activity.’ – Tara Dublin

This follows the same pattern matching that of Stewart Rhodes’ conduct towards lower level Oath Keepers. It appears these federal informants leading these groups are there to specifically set up low-level members on behalf of the federal government. Rhodes has not been charged with anything in relation to January 6, despite the government quoting him extensively to charge the low-level people. They cite Rhodes’ statements to punish others and refer to him as basically the leader of a criminal conspiracy. Yet the government continues to protect Rhodes.

Please note that Feuer says “others may emerge,” because he knows there were more informants there that day.

Now, let’s get to the actual New York Times story. I want to go through this and explain what I think the Times is doing:

A look at the headline makes it seem like this one a one-off thing. It makes it sound like there was only one informant there that day. The article begins:

As scores of Proud Boys made their way, chanting and shouting, toward the Capitol on Jan. 6, one member of the far-right group was busy texting a real-time account of the march.

The recipient was his F.B.I. handler.

In the middle of an unfolding melee that shook a pillar of American democracy — the peaceful transfer of power — the bureau had an informant in the crowd, providing an inside glimpse of the action, according to confidential records obtained by The New York Times. In the informant’s version of events, the Proud Boys, famous for their street fights, were largely following a pro-Trump mob consumed by a herd mentality rather than carrying out any type of preplanned attack.

After meeting his fellow Proud Boys at the Washington Monument that morning, the informant described his path to the Capitol grounds where he saw barriers knocked down and Trump supporters streaming into the building, the records show. At one point, his handler appeared not to grasp that the building had been breached, the records show, and asked the informant to keep him in the loop — especially if there was any violence.

The use of informants always presents law enforcement officials with difficult judgments about the credibility and completeness of the information they provide. In this case, the records obtained by The Times do not directly address whether the informant was in a good position to know about plans developed for Jan. 6 by the leadership of the Proud Boys, why he was cooperating, whether he could have missed indications of a plot or whether he could have deliberately misled the government.

But the records, and information from two people familiar with the matter, suggest that federal law enforcement had a far greater visibility into the assault on the Capitol, even as it was taking place, than was previously known.

At the same time, the new information is likely to complicate the government’s efforts to prove the high-profile conspiracy charges it has brought against several members of the Proud Boys.

On Jan. 6, and for months after, the records show, the informant, who was affiliated with a Midwest chapter of the Proud Boys, denied that the group intended to use violence that day. In lengthy interviews, the records say, he also denied that the extremist organization planned in advance to storm the Capitol. The informant’s identity was not disclosed in the records.

The records describing the informant’s account of Jan. 6 — excerpts from his interviews and communications with the F.B.I. before, during and after the riot — dovetail with assertions made by defense lawyers who have argued that even though several Proud Boys broke into the Capitol, the group did not arrive in Washington with a preset plot to storm the building. – NYT

The way this is being presented is very interesting. The FBI had previously leaked to Reuters that they found no “plot” to storm the Capitol that day. This contradicts the absurd fiction and hysterical assertions by the House January 6 Committee Democrats, that Trump himself planned the “attack” on the Capitol. The article continues:

They also raise new questions about the performance of the F.B.I. in tracking the threat from far-right groups like the Proud Boys.

The records — provided to The Times on the condition that they not be directly quoted — show the F.B.I. was investigating at least two other participants in the rally on Jan. 6 and asked the informant to make contact with them, suggesting that they might be Proud Boys.

Moreover, the records indicate that F.B.I. officials in Washington were alerted in advance of the attack that the informant was traveling to the Capitol with several other Proud Boys.

The F.B.I. also had an additional informant with ties to another Proud Boys chapter that took part in the sacking of the Capitol, according to a person familiar with the matter, raising questions about the quality of the bureau’s informants and what sorts of questions they were being asked by their handlers before Jan. 6.

Christopher A. Wray, the bureau’s director, acknowledged to Congress in March that the F.B.I. was studying the quality of the intelligence it had gathered about Jan. 6.

“Anytime there’s an attack, especially one that’s this horrific, that strikes right at the heart of our system of government, right at the time the transfer of power is being discussed, you can be darn tootin’ that we are focused very, very hard on how can we get better sources, better information, better analysis so that we can make sure that something like what happened on Jan. 6th never happens again,” he said during the congressional hearing.

In a statement, the F.B.I. said that intelligence gathering was central to its mission of protecting the American people and upholding the Constitution.

“While the F.B.I.’s standard practice is not to discuss its sources and methods, it is important to understand that sources provide valuable information regarding criminal activity and national security matters,” the bureau said.

The new information was revealed at a time when misinformation continues to circulate among far-right commentators and websites accusing the F.B.I. of having used informants or agents to stage the attack on Jan. 6. But if anything, the records appear to show that the informant’s F.B.I. handler was slow to grasp the gravity of what was happening that day. And the records show that the informant traveled to Washington at his own volition, not at the request of the F.B.I.

The question of whether extremist groups like the Proud Boys conspired in advance of Jan. 6 to organize the worst assault on the Capitol in more than 200 years is one of the most important avenues of inquiry being pursued by the authorities. But the records describing the informant are only one piece of a much larger puzzle that includes other information about the group.

The informant, who started working with the F.B.I. in July 2020, appears to have been close to several other members of his Proud Boys chapter, including some who have been charged in the attack. But it is not clear from the records obtained by The Times how well he knew the group’s top leaders or whether he was in the best position to learn about potential plans to storm the Capitol.

As more and more Proud Boys have been arrested in connection with the attack, the group has been increasingly plunged into an atmosphere of suspicion about the presence of informants in their ranks.

The dark mood started three weeks after the riot when it suddenly emerged that Enrique Tarrio, the group’s leader, had himself worked as a F.B.I. informant well before he joined the Proud Boys.

Mr. Tarrio was not at the Capitol on Jan. 6, having been ordered by a local judge to stay away from Washington after his arrest days earlier on charges of illegally possessing ammunition magazines and burning a Black Lives Matter banner after a pro-Trump rally in December. He is currently serving a five-month sentence on the charges. – NYT

We can see here why the FBI chose to divulge this information to the New York Times. They seek to paint the narrative that while they now concede they did have informants present that day, they did not order them to storm the Capitol. This is actually quite humorous, hinting in this piece of more involvement than they are letting on.

The media has gone from first claiming as a “conspiracy theory” that FBI informants present that day might have instigated what happened, to admitting there were informants that day. The spin they apply here is that actually the use of informants is “central” to the FBI’s ability to “protect America,” and having informants was actually a good thing. They claim the informants were there merely to document events; they were not there to storm the Capitol at the behest of the FBI.

That they even attempt to make that case is testament to the diligent investigative work being done by journalists like Darren Beatie of Revolver News, Julie Kelly of American Greatness and this correspondent. The article continues:

Prosecutors have filed conspiracy charges against 15 members of the Proud Boys in four separate but interlocking cases, and they are some of the most prominent allegations levied in more than 600 cases brought in connection with the Capitol attack.

In seeking to prove that the Proud Boys planned the assault in advance then worked together on Jan. 6 to disrupt the certification of the Electoral College vote, prosecutors have claimed in court papers that their leaders raised money to bring people to Washington; gathered equipment like protective vests and multichannel radios; and ordered subordinates to avoid wearing their typical black-and-yellow polo shirts in favor of more ordinary clothes.

The F.B.I. has also collected incendiary social media posts and recordings of podcasts in which prominent Proud Boys members embrace a kind of revolutionary zeal after President Donald J. Trump’s loss to Joseph R. Biden Jr., with some suggesting that “traitors” should be shot or that civil war was on the horizon.

As part of their investigation, federal agents ultimately obtained thousands of private group chats sent among dozens of Proud Boys on the messaging app Telegram. In one of the chats, written the night before the riot, a Proud Boys leader told his troops to be decentralized and use good judgment, adding, “Cops are the primary threat.”

But statements from the informant appear to counter the government’s assertion that the Proud Boys organized for an offensive assault on the Capitol intended to stop the peaceful transition from Mr. Trump to Mr. Biden.

On the eve of the attack, the records show, the informant said that the group had no plans to engage in violence the next day except to defend itself from potential assaults from leftist activists — a narrative the Proud Boys have often used to excuse their own violent behavior.

Then, during an interview in April, the informant again told his handlers that Proud Boys leaders gave explicit orders to maintain a defensive posture on Jan. 6. At another point in the interview, he said that he never heard any discussion that day about stopping the Electoral College process.

The records show that, after driving to Washington and checking into an Airbnb in Virginia on Jan. 5, the informant spent most of Jan. 6 with other Proud Boys, including some who have been charged in the attack. While the informant mentioned seeing Proud Boys leaders that day, like Ethan Nordean, who has also been charged, there is no indication that he was directly involved with any Proud Boys in leadership positions.

In a detailed account of his activities contained in the records, the informant, who was part of a group chat of other Proud Boys, described meeting up with scores of men from chapters around the country at 10 a.m. on Jan. 6 at the Washington Monument and eventually marching to the Capitol. He said that when he arrived, throngs of people were already streaming past the first barrier outside the building, which, he later learned, was taken down by one of his Proud Boy acquaintances and a young woman with him.

The records say that the informant entered the Capitol after debating whether to do so with his compatriots. He then told his handlers, according to the records, that after police officers informed him that someone — possibly the pro-Trump rioter Ashli Babbitt — had been shot inside the building, he left the through a window. The records say that he hurt no one and broke nothing. – NYT

The reporting here from the Times appears to claim that this particular informant wasn’t a leader of the group. Therefore they can claim the FBI did not lead the charge that day, completely ignoring the fact that two of the leaders of the Proud Boys were already exposed as FBI informants. This article glosses over Enrique Tarrio having been an informant prior to his leading the Proud Boys. As though it were completely inconsequential, the Times disregards that fact. The article continues:

According to the records, the informant first began to tell the F.B.I. what he knew about Jan. 6 in late December after a pro-Trump rally in Washington that month turned violent. He showed his handlers screenshots of an online chat board known to be popular among Trump supporters indicating that some so-called normal conservatives were planning to bring weapons to Washington in January, the records show.

But the records contain no indication that the informant was aware of a possible plot by Proud Boys leaders to purposefully instigate those normal Trump supporters — or what members of the group refer to as “normies” — on Jan. 6.

According to court papers in one case, a Proud Boys leader from Philadelphia wrote on the group’s Telegram channel on the morning of Jan. 6, “I want to see thousands of normies burn that city to ash today.”

Then, after the attack was over, another leader of the chapter, summed up his thoughts about the riot on the chat, according to court papers.

“That was NOT what I expected to happen today,” he wrote. “All from us showing up and starting some chants and getting the normies all riled up.” – NYT

The case they are discussing along with the relevant chats emerged last week, and were already identified as containing an FBI informant. We knew that, by the simple fact that the government didn’t disclose the person’s identity, nor where they were charged. This appears to be a way for the FBI to get ahead of that. The New York Times also notes a key fact in this whole scenario, that other FBI informants “may emerge,” signaling what I think is a subtle admission that they KNOW they will. The fact that these admissions from the Feds are now forthcoming indicates that more explosive information will surface soon.

If the conduct of the FBI in the fake “Whitmer kidnapping plot” is any indication, the Feds had far more involvement and wanted a specific narrative that day. In the Whitmer case, the FBI literally told their informants the “mission is to kill governor.”  They were involved in the planning of the plot from start to finish. Their main informant out of 12 was the second-in-command of the group, led their tactical training, and brought Adam Fox into the group against the wishes of other members.

The government has tied these two cases together in court claiming that the fake kidnap plot was the “precursor” to January 6. If that is true, then it was the FBI leading the entire pseudo-insurrection caper on January 6 at the United States Capitol Building.

This story is still developing. Please check back for updates. 

See a spelling or grammar error? Let us know! Highlight the text and press Ctrl+Enter.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments