Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
‘I Can’t Go into Sources and Methods….’
There is truly an extraordinary exchange between Ted Cruz and the FBI’s Jill Sanborn in a Senate hearing. Ted Cruz repeatedly asks Miss Sanborn about Ray Epps and other possible FBI agents’ involvement promoting the January 6 riot in the Capitol.
Video shows Ray Epps, among other things, encouraging unlawful entry into the Capitol building, yet he has never been prosecuted. Why?
Under Ted Cruz’s repeated questioning, Ms. Sanborn repeatedly states, “I can’t answer that.” I suppose she hopes you will think that she is saying that she does not know. However, she precedes the litany of “I can’t answer that” responses by saying that she is “can’t go into sources and methods….” What does that tell us? Her “I can’t answer that” is all about sources and methods, not any lack of knowledge.
As I hear her testimony, her “I can’t answer that” is because it would reveal “sources and methods.” Who sources and methods? The FBI’s, of course. In other words, I hear her answers as essentially admitting that the FBI was involved in encouraging the January 6 unlawful entry into the Capitol building. Here is the video:
.@SenTedCruz: "Did any FBI agents or confidential informants actively participate in the events of January 6th? Yes or no?"
FBI's Jill Sanborn: "I can't answer that." pic.twitter.com/Z5Sj1tSyNx
— CSPAN (@cspan) January 11, 2022
.Published in General
Ted Cruz, call for a closed hearing.
Multiple defendants are said to have subpoenaed Epps.
Here is an example:
Nothing about that shows on the docket:
The GOP let the FBI get away with stonewalling. Our GOPe sucks.
So defund the FBI.
I mean, stop grandstanding and do something. The New York Times (no friends of conservatives or the Trump administration) already confirmed months ago that the FBI had assets embedded in the protesters. Let’s not pretend this is new information.
Wake me when the GOP actually finds its balls.
It’s one thing for government officials to conceal and obfuscate during Senate hearings, but when did it become the norm to come off as complete ignorant idiots in doing so:
For example here is FBI’s National Security Division chief Matthew Olsen answering questions yesterdays Senate hearings:
Has Epps been named as a witness in any of the criminal actions brought against the hundreds of defendants?
The FBI even went and arrested that one fellow back home in Arizona who entered the building late, took some selfies, and left when a cop told him to leave–no doubt a wild, desperate 7-minute non-rampage on his part.
If the feds had not bothered with most of the rioters and only focused on the few really bad actors, then maybe leaving Epps out of it would be reasonable. But given their overall approach going from wanted posters to silence this omission requires an explanation.
As the minority party, there is a limit to what Ted Cruz and the GOP could do in this situation except ask pointed questions that to any rational person demonstrated that the FBI was speaking with forked tongue. There should be limits on the “means and sources” excuse.
Ms. Sanborn’s responses can be taken as the FBI was involved in the Capitol riot using both informants, provocateurs to include using agents as provocateurs. She did not deny that they were involved.
The problem is that the Senate is not a law enforcement organization. The Senate can petition the DOJ to conduct a criminal investigation, and if there is enough evidence bring charges. Don’t count on the current DOJ to take time away from searching for parent domestic terrorists at school board meetings.
I can’t help but think of all the Democrats were able to accomplish when they were the minority party from 2016 to 2018. Including getting a fraudulent “Russian Collusion Hoax” investigation going, knowing full well it was their party’s own candidate who committed the treason.
Why is it that Democrats are able to act toward the destruction of the country when they aren’t even in power, and the Republicans can’t act to save the country even when they are?
The Republicans have now power beyond asking questions. What would you suggests they be doing?
Have those people charged gotten legal help to defend their constitutional rights or has that help dried up because of intimidation of the legal beagles by the communists and the woke mob.
This is the same Ted Cruz who referred to the rioters as “domestic terrorists,” yes? The Hell with him.
So, eternal sleep then?
Throwing sand in the gears as much as possible. Sometimes “inaction” is as good as action.
Oh, you want something from us, Democrats? The answer is no.
This is overblown. First, there is an easy explanation. We know that groups like the Proud Boys and other potentially violent groups were at the 1/6 riot. It’s not fanciful to believe that the FBI has informants in those organizations and that identifying them would put them in danger.
Cruz asked about “agents and informants” not just one or the other. That is the simplest explanation of why the Sanborn answered the way she did. Further, Cruz’s last question was pretty direct: did agents or informants or anyone else working at the direction of the FBI commit acts of violence on 1/6? Sanborn’s answer: no, not to my knowledge. That’s the answer that matters.
So, did the FBI lie to Cruz? Maybe. Or there is a simpler explanation than false flag conspiracy theories.
Good lord. Hatred of Trump will make “conservatives” justify anything.
Do you also have a “reasonable” explanation for the violations of constitutional right to a public speedy trial for those charged and incarcerated for what ordinarily would be a misdemeanor offense?
I think we are probably dealing with something much more serious than hatred of Trump, maybe hatred of American Republic. Joe Biden’s speech yesterday.
Seems too cute by half, parsing it as those who might be both agents and informers. In any case, didn’t Sanborn swear to tell the whole truth? (Honest question. I’m not familiar with the oath witnesses to a Congressional committee swear.)
Yes, we have so much reason to believe these officials never lie to Congress or courts.
I wish Cruz had asked how many were arrested immediately at the Capitol by police officers and what were the charges.
From USA Today. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2022/01/11/house-panel-debunks-jan-6-conspiracy-theory-touted-gop-senators/9178404002/ Ray Epps is the new Kracken.
Within hours, though, the special House Committee investigating the Capitol insurrection debunked the conspiracy theory, disclosing that it had interviewed the Arizona man, Ray Epps, and that he had denied taking part in any such government operation.
Epps has become central to a viral – and unfounded – conspiracy theory in recent months after widely circulated video of him exhorting pro-Trump supporters the evening of Jan. 5 to enter the Capitol the next day. At some point, some protesters began chanting, “Fed, fed, fed,” apparently suspicious that Epps was there trying to incite rallygoers on behalf of the FBI.
Why do you say “unfounded” and then cite the evidence showing Epps involvement? There is more evidence about Epps on the adjacent grounds of the Capitol than for any other identified individual. Are you really a lawyer?
I think that your beef is with USA Today, not me.
The next time we both come to a meet-up, I will show you my State Bar of Arizona card.
I thought those were your words. I wouldn’t bother to cite or contest anything printed by USA Today.
Gary didn’t even know who Epps was until a couple days ago. He doesn’t exactly follow actual news stories, only what the propagandists spoon feed him.
The committee, which is already filled with liars and frauds, says that we can believe them when they say Epps is not a fed.
Are you really this gullible, or do you think we are?
Congress-critters on both sides of the aisle are professional liars. And yet you believe them.
More seriously, do you really this committee just accepts, “Nope, not me. I didn’t do nuthin'” from witnesses? How is mere denial by someone suspected of inciting the riot enough to say anything is “debunked”? If the committee has evidence beyond Mr. Epps testimony (or that of anyone else), they should release it.
His problem is the same problem with all other mainline “Republicans.” They only get their news and information from Democrat-approved sources like the Washington Post or CNN. They’d never be so low as to access, say, Breitbart or The Federalist or Daily Signal or any other “unapproved” sources. If they did, they might learn something. But they’re only getting absolutely slanted “news.” (i.e., propaganda.)
If no feds incited violence on January 6th, there is no reason to not give a definitive no, because there would be nothing to hide.
If what the feds say is true, then there is no reason to not arrest Epps as he is the only one on camera inciting violence.
You have to be insane levels of stupid to buy any of this trash.
Epps was inciting people to break into the capitol, but the committee says that’s no big deal. Which pretty much knocks the legs out of their beef with President Trump. And all the other Republicans they now wish to prevent from running for office again using a Civil-War era ruling.