FBI

The Gretchen Whitmer Kidnapping Plot Looks an Awful Lot Like Entrapment

This is a much more persuasive example of Deep State nefariousness than January 6.

|

The militia members who allegedly plotted to kidnap Michigan's Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer because of her COVID-19 lockdown policies will go to trial in just a few weeks. Six were charged in connection with the plot, and one of them has already pleaded guilty and is expected to testify against the rest. State authorities charged eight others with aiding a terrorist plot.

But the government's case against these 14 alleged extremists relies on work done by at least a dozen government informants and undercover FBI agents whose extensive involvement in the plot calls into question whether it would have moved forward at all without the government's prodding. Some of these government actors took lead roles in organizing the supposed plot—one of the informants was even paid $54,000 by the FBI.

Taken together, these and other details raise the strong possibility that the militia members were victims of entrapment on the part of the FBI.

Indeed, the revelations have prompted considerable, welcome scrutiny of the case from the mainstream media. "The FBI Investigation Into The Alleged Plot To Kidnap Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer Has Gotten Very Complicated," conceded BuzzFeed News in an in-depth examination of the available evidence published last month. And earlier this week, The New York Times acknowledged that the involvement of informants and agents had "muddled" the case:

On a rainy night in northern Michigan in September 2020, a group of armed men divided among three cars surveyed the landscape around the vacation cottage of Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, considering how to kidnap her as payback for her Covid-19 lockdown measures.

Two men descended from the lead car to inspect a bridge on Route 31 in nearby Elk Rapids, assessing what was needed to blow it up to delay any police response to the house on nearby Birch Lake.

Later, after team members returned to the rural camp where they had already conducted military-style training exercises, a man identified as "Big Dan" in government documents asked the assembled group, "Everybody down with what's going on?" Another man responded, "If you are not down with the thought of kidnapping, don't sit here."

Of the dozen men on that nighttime surveillance mission, four of them including "Big Dan" were either government informants or undercover F.B.I. agents, according to court documents.

"Big Dan" was no passive spectator: After initially alerting the authorities that he was involved in a Facebook group for militia members in which violence against police officers had been discussed, he agreed to become an informant. The government paid him $54,000 for six months' work. When the militia group surveilled Whitmer's vacation home, it was Big Dan leading the charge. According to the group's defense attorneys, Big Dan—an Iraq War veteran—took charge of training the other men in military tactics.

And that's not all: Big Dan's FBI handler, Jayson Chambers, had a side hustle. Chambers was attempting to build a security consulting business in the midst of the investigation; it's easy to see how his desire to create a brand for himself could have led him to encourage Big Dan to nudge the plot along. BuzzFeed obtained a resume that Chambers had shared with prospective clients, and in that document, he took credit for using "online undercover techniques" to investigate terrorist groups. According to BuzzFeed, Chambers has a long history of participating in FBI investigations of Muslim youths who were enticed by law enforcement to become involved in wholly theoretical violent plots, according to their defense attorneys.

Chambers is no longer slated to participate in the trial.

Another government asset, Stephen Robeson, worked as an informant during the investigation, but is no longer involved after pleading guilty to various felonies. And the government's star witness, FBI Agent Robert Trask, was fired by the agency after beating his wife following an orgy at a swingers party. Suffice it to say, it's very hard to tell the cops from the criminals in this matter.

The court may determine that none of this matters, and that even though the defendants were clearly goaded into action by the very law enforcement agents seeking to ensnare them, they still made the colossally stupid decision to proceed. Historically, victims of entrapment have had a tough time prevailing, no matter how duplicitously the FBI behaved.

But in any case, it is now clear that Whitmer was in no real danger. At all stages of the alleged plot, the FBI was aware of every facet: Their agents and informants were intimately involved—not just surveilling the militia members, but actively offering guidance on how to pull off the kidnapping. Yet Whitmer has become a more sympathetic figure on the national stage because she is perceived as a victim of former President Donald Trump's reckless rhetoric and emboldening of right-wing domestic terrorists.

"Every time the president ramps up his violent rhetoric, every time he fires up Twitter to launch another broadside against me, my family and I see a surge of vicious attacks sent our way," wrote Whitmer in an Atlantic article titled, "The Plot to Kidnap Me." The thrust of her piece is that Trump's criticism of governors in blue states inspires real violence, and she cites her own case as a near-example. Trump undoubtedly said many things that were vile and wrong, but the person most responsible for the Whitmer kidnapping plot is the FBI agent who greenlit this farce. (Ironically, in a speech condemning Trump for egging on right-wing terrorists, Whitmer thanked the FBI for thwarting the plot.)

Many conservatives have become committed to the idea that the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol was not the work of Trump supporters, but rather, elements of the so-called Deep State. There's no evidence for that; the Capitol riot is one of the clearer cases of Trump's remarks leading to actual mayhem and violence. The Whitmer kidnapping plot, on the other hand, was extensively directed and encouraged by agents of the government. It's a much, much, much, much more persuasive case of Deep State nefariousness.

NEXT: Despite Multiple Redesigns and Rebrandings, This Grant Program Continues To Be a White House Slush Fund

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. SAY IT AIN'T SO!

    1. But that J6 Insurrection? Totally happened.

      At this point I'd be willing to bet that the tiki torchers from years back was just another FBI plot.

      1. As if. Next you're going to tell me that everyone at Justice For J6 was a fed or a cop.
        Just look at these alt-right ne'er-do-wells and tell me that their feds: https://twitter.com/Kaitain_US/status/1439278360744456193?

          1. Nothing screams authentic alt-right like athletic men wearing identical federal khaki trousers neatly tucked into booties while also carrying identical fashionably-fascistic shields.

            https://youtu.be/qveMz8vi1OI

            1. Surreal to watch a government fabricate its own opposition.

              1. We got pretty much 4 years of if starting in 2016

          2. Wow. When they fuck each other up the ass, how do they know which one they are fucking?

            1. The one in the dress is the Director

        1. What if the protests are all just a law enforcement fight club? It's not like you would ever get anybody to talk about it.

      2. Well, it kinda was. At least one guy was former fbi, another had worked for them before, and then to top it off, the fbi was specifically asked on two occasions if they were involved, and both times said they can’t answer that question.

        Of course they were involved.

    2. So what, just like the ragheads, these goofy bearded cr4ck3rs need to waterboarded till we find them all and flush them down the drain like Bin Laden.

    3. Entrapment : FBI standard operating procedure

    4. The whole thing is silly, Why would anyone want to kninap her? She's a lefty governor of a lefty state. Wouldn't there have to be a reason? Those people in the Capital were just a bunch of rednecks, they weren't insurrectionists. now the people attacking the Federal buildings in Portland night after night were much more domestic terrorists than some freak in the capital building with a viking hat on. Of course nothing happened to them. The people who set up their little idiot zone in Seattle managed to pretty much skate as well. Of course this was all politically orchestrated. This is why the middle 80% of the country doesn't think much of Clappers FBI. The only people that think the DOJ is honorable and honest are the people at the top of the DOJ. Everyone else can see that they are not to be trusted. Unfortunately they own the court system.

      1. We’re not a left wing state! Only Detroit, specifically Wayne county and flint are Democrat. The rest of Hard Republican!

        1. ***the rest of the state is hard Republican.*** stupid autocorrect

        2. she won, your state voted for her, your state has moved left

          1. Are you enrolled in Remedial Geography?
            You should be.

          2. No it has not. Only the governor and her supporters. The rest of us do not support her, her policies or her little drunkard Atty. Gen. Once you get past Destroyit, Flint and the rest of the downstate cities, you are in conservative territory.
            No support for her up north.

        3. We’re not a left wing state! Only Detroit, specifically Wayne county and flint are Democrat. The rest of Hard Republican!

          We are definitely a very bluish-purple state. Basically the entire SE corner, plus Lansing and Grand Rapids. All of the highest population areas are quite blue. Most of the west Michigan area is slowly turning blue as well. Thankfully, most of it is a less crazy shade of blue than Commifornia.

          1. Liberalism and insanity are the same.

    5. I came home from the Vietnam War to see our government doing this to the anti-war protesters.
      Recently I conversed with one of the former FBI agents, who stopped his hate when confronted with my many experiences watching them.
      You liked it then.
      Why the change, Toots?

    6. They got caught.
      It's punishment time.

    7. J Edgar Hoover fine-tuned entrapment during the protest against the Vietnam War. Read the book "The Secret Life of J Edgar Hoover" by a Irish Investigative reporter. Hoover got Congress to ban the book in the US for 10 years. Can't believe that the "terrorists" were dumb enough to fall for the play!

  2. ...the Capitol riot is one of the clearer cases of Trump's remarks leading to actual mayhem and violence.

    Soave, that is bullshit. Point to the specific remarks that incited actual mayhem and violence. Back it up, jack.

    1. The whole argument is really, really ex cathedra. This Deep State terrorist plot looks like a deep state terrorist plot but this other... incident is totally not a deep state terrorist plot because I know a deep state terrorist plot when I see one (despite my not identifying the other incident as a Deep State terrorist plot until pretty much right now).

      Probably a great time to go back and read Malcolm Gladwell's Blink to see how well it has aged.

      1. No kidding. It's like saying a baseball that scrapes the fence cannot be a homerun because it didn't go as far as this other baseball that went out of the ballpark.

    2. I think it is plausible to say that Trump had been feeding the flames for a couple weeks. But that is different from direct incitement. Direct incitement is saying: "Get in there!". But to my knowledge, Trump was still speaking when protestors that weren't even at his speech started busting into the building.

      Again, I'm open to the idea that incitement occurred, it is just that the timing never made sense.

      1. Pointing out inconsistencies and questions about a unique election where he wasn't even being heard in courts due to courts calling challenges moot isn't incitement. Since that time we know of nearly 2 dozen court cases that acknowledged election rules were illegally changed by election boards, courts, and the executive.

        1. He should've incited a full on revolt.

        2. So now you’re down to rule changes? Because wasn’t it ballots, shredding, dead people, dominion, triple counting, and uncounted ballots all last year? And when each of those got dismissed, you’d cling to a new one? Fuck your illegal rule changes. Trump is a mob boss trying to threaten georgia into changing the votes - or else! What a dipshit. I was a fool to ever buy into his bullshit.

          1. Hey idiot. The ones that went to trial were largely in favor of trump. What the fuck are you talking about?

            1. He said he was an idiot, so that bolsters his credibility right there.

          2. Rules changes are what potentially allowed the other things to happen and made it impossible to audit meaningfully.

            And if you “bought into this bullshit” you are an idiot because you should never “buy into” anything. Use your dmn head and think for yourself.

        3. They were NOT!
          Stop the Big Lie.
          You and Rumpy LOST.

      2. Yeah, I can't use the word "incitement" when it comes to Trump because that's a very limited and specific term. Brandenburg v. Ohio set out the standard for inciting speech and Trump never crossed it in any public speech I've seen, so he's well within the First Amendment.

        But I'll agree that Trump had been working on getting people agitated for quite a while prior. That said, Trump was kind of a reflection of the attitudes of his constituency, and if there were very few people concerned that fraud had occurred during the election, Trump wouldn't have had anything to say.

    3. He's been sucking left wing cock for a long time.

    4. Trump will die in a cage.

    5. Read the book "Secret Life of J Edgar Hoover" and learn.

  3. Wait the plot where the vast majority were degenerate FBI agents who all but dragged people along with them? That one?

    I mean it seemed totally grass roots, what with all those buff, square jawed, ray-ban wearing, totally average joe white guys.

    Dont think they still wont use it as an excuse to expand their powers to prevent future "kidnapping" plots

    1. Crap like this will continue as long as the FBI exists.
      Defund and close down the FBI. Use the building to house homeless veterans.
      But first, it will need to be deloused and fumigated.

      1. Crap like this goes all the way back to J. Edgar Hoover and the creation of the FBI, so why would any one expect it to stop absent drastic reforms.

        1. It won't. That's why JohnZ is right. It's time to close the FBI.

          1. Not just the fbi - the cia is the main contributor to all this shitshow. Probably all intelligence agencies need to be reeled in and decommissioned

        2. all the way back to J. Edgar Hoover

          "I want you to infiltrate these gay commie parades. Now, you are gonna have to dress up in drag, so let me give you some tips..."

    2. They're working on their presentation.

      Next time, choice of NASCAR or Ted Nugent t-shirts!

  4. "After initially alerting the authorities that he was involved in a Facebook group for militia members in which violence against police officers had been discussed . . .

    There is no substitute for refusing to use Facebook. You can avoid experiencing everything you don't like about Facebook by refusing to use Facebook for anything--and that includes WhatsApp. You can and should deplatform Facebook from your life, and we should encourage everyone we know and care about to do likewise. Using Facebook is willfully setting your privacy on fire. Don't set your privacy on fire. There is no constitutional, libertarian, or capitalist recourse for people who willfully set their privacy on fire.

    1. I agree. Fb is the worst. Only a fool would have it on their phone.

      That said, I still have it on my phone. Fuck

      1. Just use the mobile web interface, ideally in a separate privacy conscious browser.

  5. I live close to Elk Rapids and this is the first I've heard about this part of the set up.
    Who should have been kidnapped is her drunken man hating lesbo Attorney General, Dana Nessel, who continues to make a fool of herself on an almost daily basis. The latest incident was the islamic terrorist who took over a Synagogue in Texas, by declaring he was a white supremacist. Groan. Michigan has a difficult enough time as it is without her spewing such mindless rubbish.
    At any rate, the FBI's case is unraveling and may soon wither away altogether after all the facts are presented to the court.
    But then there are always surprises in such cases.

    1. Who should have been kidnapped is her drunken man hating lesbo Attorney General, Dana Nessel, who continues to make a fool of herself on an almost daily basis.

      So, fresh out of Quantico or have you been assigned to a branch yet? 🙂

      1. Expect a SWAT team and helicopter and...CNN to be at your door very soon.

    2. the islamic terrorist who took over a Synagogue in Texas, by declaring he was a white supremacist

      Hey, Arabs are Caucasian too, buddy.

      1. Arabs are semites :p

  6. Honestly, is there a federal law enforcement agency which shouldn't be abolished? Even the NCIS on TV has been going downhill for years.

    1. I met an NCIS agent once. When asked about the show, he said "I've never solved a case in an hour".

      1. That's why he's not good enough to get on TV.

        1. Probably didn't have powerful enough "Enhance" technology, where you can just repeat "Enhance" 3X and you can get tire marks from which you can narrow down the search to three cars.
          "Ah, but these particular tires were only sold for 3 months back in spring of 2012, and only from two tire shops and one of the shops has had all of them returned, leaving...three cars. One of them driven by an old grandma, one is out of service in a junkyard, and one driven by...Grigory Ulyezovich, retired KGB agent currently residing at...Gibbs! Come back, I didn't give you the address yet!"

          Or getting a fingerprint off the surface of a shiny pole in a photograph. THAT was pretty great, amirite?

      2. Probably never solved a case at all with logic like that.

        The show takes 1 real time hour, but rarely do the events play out in real time. Does he also think that NCIS only receives 1 case a week?

  7. Many conservatives have become committed to the idea that the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol was not the work of Trump supporters, but rather, elements of the so-called Deep State. There's no evidence for that; the Capitol riot is one of the clearer cases of Trump's remarks

    Actually, that’s not true. You can look me up. I was there. The only thing I can say is that which my lawyers have instructed me to comment, which is as follows: “My involvement in the events of January 6th cannot be taken seriously as no one in they’re right mind could have considered my sad and pathetic attempts to overthrow the government were serious. Rather, my ridiculous actions were a desperate attempt to draw attention to myself. I am a sad and pathetic Black gay conservative who is GOPProud”

    There. That’s what happened.

    1. Poor Shrike. All that obsessing over OBL posts and you still can't pull off parody.
      Soros fanboys can't meme.

    2. Amazing that this moron persists with this. Does he really think it's clever or funny?

      1. Look- when he posts as SPB, he has to deal with people pointing out that he is a trafficker in child porn. Give the poor guy a bone and let him assume this identity.

        I seriously mean it. I would rather he continue to do this deeply unfunny meta parody than continuously pretending that an identity linked to kiddy porn can just post without comment on the threads.

        1. Or better yet he could turn himself in for his crimes.

          1. ^this.

        2. Lots more Lord of Strazzle post recently too.

          1. Sir strudel is Jacob Sullum.

            1. You don't really believe that, do you? Sullum had a bad case of TDS, but otherwise I don't see the similarity.

              1. He talked in first person as Sullum, responding to a question posed directly to Sullum in one of his articles. While saying Sullum is the best writer at Reason.

                No, I’m not positive, but it sure seemed like it was him at the time, and now I just find it amusing.

                  1. I was wrong about it being a question, but yep, that’s what I was thinking of.

              2. Los has stated that sullum is a great and smart writer. Not even sullum mom would say that

    3. Shrike is terrible at this.

      1. He’s not very smart and he’s probably distracted by the Disney Channel and Nick Jr..

    4. Nice work on the "I am sad and pathetic" part.

  8. I am sure Bennie "da Mumbla" Thompson can find something to hold them on ...

  9. Of cousre it's absurd. Kidnapping a govenor. Overthrowing a govt. Seizing voting machines. It's all absurd. Here we are.

    "Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities."

    Voltaire

    1. “Some women have penises.”

      —progressives

      1. "That's a man, baby!"
        -Austin Powers

        1. I’m guessing that scene will be edited out in the future.

    2. You got that off the poster in your psychiatrists office didn't you?

    3. Yes, it is indeed absurd to believe that there was a serious plot to kidnap a governor or overthrow the government.
      So what atrocities will you commit when told to do so?

      1. His posts are atrocious enough.

        1. and absurd. double-play.

      2. Support for FBI entrapment?

  10. I've never seen a rag try to cover more for terrorists between this and January 6th. Pathetic.

    1. You should have seen how the BLM riots and secession were covered for over a year.

    2. Wait, what? Are you saying you approve of the FBI plotting to kidnap a governor?

      1. I think he just called the FBI terrorist.

      2. Joe Friday will be by shortly to note all the sympathizers in this thread. As soon as he is finished furiously masturbating to Whitmer's picture.

        1. Whitmer reminds me of a younger Hillary. Pictures of either work as birth control.

  11. Robby - "...the Capitol riot is one of the clearer cases of Trump's remarks leading to actual mayhem and violence."

    Trump on Jan 6 - “Go home with love and peace, remember this day forever“

    They already hate you Robby. Adding a little bit of their phony narrative to your story isn't going to save you.

    1. He got invited to one party last year, hope springs eternal.

    2. WHY, on that show, does Robbie ALWAYS look like an already drunk guy coming onto Ecstasy??

      1. That's his smug Sophistocrat face. He worked hard in that.

  12. "Many conservatives have become committed to the idea that the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol was not the work of Trump supporters, but rather, elements of the so-called Deep State. There's no evidence for that; the Capitol riot is one of the clearer cases of Trump's remarks leading to actual mayhem and violence.."

    Well, that is just a flat out lie. Not even mistake, wrong, debatable.... We all know you have seen the same stuff we have. So "no evidence" is a straight-up lie.

    You might find the evidence weak. Or uncompelling. Or even flat out goofy.

    But saying it doesn't exist is not true.

    I personally am not sure what it all means. But it is a damned sight beyond "no evidence".

    1. And in any case, it's being used as an excuse for political prosecutions and illegal, politically motivated investigations by congress. That should be the big story here, not that some fucking idiots might have thought they had a chance at stopping the election certification, which they clearly never did.

      1. political prosecutions

        The rioters are being prosecuted for breaking actual laws, not for having the "wrong beliefs".

        illegal, politically motivated investigations by congress.

        Politically motivated? Well duh, it's from Congress. But illegal? What is illegal about it?

        1. As your BLM riots prove, you don't keep people locked up in jail for almost a year without charges without political motivations.
          You don't turn an unrelated stroke death into Horst Wessel, laying him in state in the Rotunda and burying him at Arlington, without political motivations.
          You don't ring the Capitol with troops and barbed wire for a few broken windows, when five months earlier you ignored an attack on the Whitehouse and the burning of St. Johns, without political motivations.
          You don't ignore the fact that your own supporters caused an even bigger riot with more damage on Jan 20, 2016, without political motivations.

          1. The little bitch will now run away and hide. As he has no response.

          2. And as everyone knows, burning churches is RACIST!! Full stop!!!

        2. And Jeff continues to ignore disparate treatment between j6 and other riots. He ignores people who brought bombs to a blm riot got less time than people who took selfies in the Capitol. That judges have reduced time and sentences for declarations supporting Biden. That j6 rioters have been barred from watching the news.

          Also jeff is fine with congress going after private banking and email documents, forced depositions, and turning over of electronics and material from rival political groups that didn't even participate in J6.

          Jeff is not a libertarian.

          1. I previously highlighted one of the cases where the only evidence listed in the affidavit was the location data from the defendant's own cell phone.

            1. Straka just got 3 months home detention, 3 years probation despite the prosecutors admitting he never went inside the Capitol building.

        3. What's illegal about it?

          The majority party did not allow the minority party to appoint their own representatives to this committee.

          They are holding secret hearings behind closed doors with no C-Span, no reporters, no cameras, no accountability.

          They are issuing subpoenas to people they are ideologically opposed to, whether they had any connection to this event or not - many of these people were not anywhere near DC on this date.

          1. They got Loretta Lynch, who is currently the attorney for a major bank (forget which one) to hand over a Trump supporters banking records without him having the opportunity to challenge it.

            All this has been presented here before. One of the ways Lying Jeffy lies is pretending information he doesn’t like doesn’t exist.

            1. JP Morgan.

            2. He should sue her, personally, in addition to the bank. He should also get some really vicious lawyers and push to get her disbarred.

              1. That would be great.

            3. I hadn't heard about that, but it's spectacularly awful as an abuse of both power and cronyism.

              Not that I would expect much less from them these days, but it's just so blatant and obvious.

          2. And congress isn't supposed to just do general investigation of crimes. It needs to have something to do with a valid legislative purpose. This is just a witch hunt.

        4. Gee, I wonder why holding people for over a year without charges (sometimes in solitary confinement) could be seen as political prosecution? Why would forcing people who at worst tresspassed to make political statements in order to get released be seen as political prosecution?

          Oh, and last time I checked, Congress isn't the judicial branch so they have fuck all right to your papers and effects.

        5. You’re right: in a legal sense, that’s what they are prosecuted for. In a practical sense, they are being politically persecuted: with excessive charges, solitary confinement, and mistreatment.

        6. When you hold people to vastly different standards of investigation and prosecution, depending on their political views, it is political persecution.
          Can anyone imagine the FBI focusing on a nationwide manhunt for a BLM, Anifa, or DisruptJ20 person for "parading without a license"?

          "Equal protection under the law" is an important principal.

  13. This is a much more persuasive example of Deep State nefariousness than January 6.

    Oh boy Robby. Now you've done it. Do try to keep up with the new Team Red rule: It's Always Team Blue's Fault
    (and of course, the supposed "deep state" and the FBI count as "Team Blue" here)

    January 6th Rioter: "Sure, I was there, I voted for Trump, I went to the rally with a bunch of my Trump-voting buddies, I took selfies of me smashing shit in the Capitol, but it's totally not my fault, it's Antifa's fault, or it's that Ray Epps guy, or it was a Deep State Reichstag fire, it's not my fault, because I'm one of the 'good guys' and I'm entitled to prevail when things aren't going my way, because I'm an 'authentic American' who deserves to prevail."

    1. Which rioter are you quoting? Or are you inventing dialogue again?

      Also, are you claiming FBI agents and affiliates didn't participate in the riot?

      1. "Also, are you claiming FBI agents and affiliates didn't participate in the riot?"

        I am interested in seeing if the usual lefties will go on record with this one. They sure seem confident their framing of what happened. Almost as confident as they were in their many confident pronouncements of The Science(tm) and COVID.

        If it does come out that there were FBI agents in the crowd on Jan 6, I wonder if they will do the same, and just shift to confidently explaining why it doesn't matter, with no acknowledgement that they are now back-peddling.

        1. The idea that the FBI had 12 ppl working on Whitmer but 0 on Jan 6 is so ridiculous it can be dismissed entirely. Everybody in the country knew the rally was coming.

          1. So I suppose this is what counts as "proof" among the conspiratorially minded - an inaccurate, cynical comparison between two very different events.

            1. That and all the non denials by the DoJ and FBI.

            2. No the proof is the FBI refusing to answer whether they were there or not, under oath. Whenever they're not involved they're falling all over each other to deny it.

            3. Yet another lefty shill talking out of both sides of his ass.

              If you are not familiar with DC, you should know that the J Edgar Hoover Building is on Pennsylvania Ave halfway between the Capitol and the White house. The crowd literally walked in front of FBI HQ to get to the Capitol Building.

              Do you still want to assert that they had no assets in the crowd? Because that would be a failure of intelligence in every sense of the word.

            4. Jeffy, you shitweasel shill, even my FBI agent niece is certain they had agents there. You really are a dishonest piece of shit.

        2. I think there’s a third possibility, beyond the stupid “Antifa set it up” versus “FBI set it up” debates here, that everyone is ignoring due to their psychological need to frame everything as extreme red or extreme blue.

          I find it more likely that there WERE cops/similar in on it…but not in their official capacities as cops/similar. People who happen to work as cops/feds/similar that wanted it to happen (“it” being trump somehow pulling out the last-second win) made calls to loosely warn/coordinate similarly-minded friends to be or not be at certain places at certain times.

          There was recently an interview with a career firefighter classic tough guy who was presented with massive evidence that his election fraud beliefs were based on misinformation but at this point it’s so integral to his “I am a tough guy patriot real American” that his psyche allows him to trust his sister-in-law’s friend on Facebook regardless of what else is presented to him. I think there were a lot of guys like that at the J6 deal and a lot of guys like that involved then and now with things both including and similar to the Whitmer plan. Guys who like that trump wants them to crack some heads with impunity. Guys that think that fellow cops who won’t beat people up for being black are pussies and non-patriots. There were likely a lot of these guys at J6 and a lot of guys like this then and now waiting for the next chance to let it out. Which is not the same as “official” involvement by a given LEO agency.

      2. Making up bullshit and putting quotes around it indicating it’s someone else’s words is one of the many different ways Lying Jeffy lies.

    2. It was a small minority who smashed anything or assaulted anyone. Prosecute them for what they did. The rest were there exercising their right to political protest. Perhaps involving some minor civil disobedience like crossing barriers or entering buildings that were supposed to be closed to the public at the time.

      1. It was a small minority who smashed anything or assaulted anyone. Prosecute them for what they did.

        That is exactly what is happening.

        1. More 400 people have been arrested. Most have been charged with illegal parading and did not commit violence or vandalism.

          You are a fucking piece of shit.

          1. Not much point arguing with him. Jeffy is the sort that would have excelled as Hitler youth, or Stalin’s Komsomol. A committed tool for the Party.

        2. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that what usually happens when there is a protest involving mass civil disobedience and some minor violence is that people arrested for the most part are released right away and either have charges dropped or pay a small fine. A few might get more serious charges if there was significant violence or property destruction. And authorities don't spend months tracking down, arresting and imprisoning everyone they can identify who was in attendance.

          1. Is there another example of Nancy Pelosi working with Loretta Lynch to get political enemies’ banking records?

            Maybe someone who Jeff hasn’t muted can ask him his opinion on this specific issue?

            1. Jeff doesn't mute, he messed up last week as proof.

              1. He may not mute, but he’s scared of a number of posters here. I know he’s terrified of me.

        3. Except it's not.

          And you're being completely disingenuous about it.

          1. I don’t call him Lying Jeffy for nothing.

      2. Trespassing is worse than 911, Zeb.

    3. chemfat simping for his lefty boos again.

    4. Why do they call me a leftist asked Jeff.

      1. the exercise in covid > heart transplant yesterday was telling.

    5. Jeff, charitable contributions out of payroll are a matter of public record, so even you could in theory check and see how agencies and administrations donate. To which party, to which candidates, and to which groups. I will give you a hint, your snide parenthetical isn't the sarcastic masterpiece you believe it to be.

    6. Team Blue still has some decent, if confused, people on it.

      Not everybody on Team Blue is a fascist a..hole like you.

    7. Are people supposed to react seriously to this fantasy scenario you just made up? That rant really serves no purpose, unless for some unfathomable reason you wanted to see if people's respect for your positions could drop below its current lofty value of 0.

  14. "Many conservatives have become committed to the idea that the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol was not the work of Trump supporters, but rather, elements of the so-called Deep State. There's no evidence for that; the Capitol riot is one of the clearer cases of Trump's remarks leading to actual mayhem and violence."

    I have not paid enough attention to this stuff to form an opinion, but this quote exemplifies sloppiness that the editors at Reason really ought to get under control.

    Specifically, Soave is trying to steal a base by including a link to an article that doesn't prove what he is asserting. In this statement he asserts 1) There is no evidence of Deep State interference and 2) This is a "clearer case of Trump's remarks leading to actual mayhem and violence"

    The problem is that Robby links to his own article that merely makes the case that Antifa didn't start the riot. He does not show that people who listened to Trump's speech were involved in the riot, or that assertions of Deep State involvement were incorrect. In fact, the article was only written a DAY after the riots in the first place. So his "evidence link" is really nothing of the sort.

    I've noticed this sneaky tendency more and more from Reason writers, and it is pretty stupid. Greenhut the other day said, "Despite what some commentators have argued, San Francisco does not yet resemble Road Warrior." And he provided a link, implying that he had found commentators making this accusation. Except the link merely went to an IMDB page for The Road Warrior.

    https://reason.com/2021/12/24/look-past-partisan-rhetoric-to-understand-californias-recent-crime-problems/

    For fucks sake, with Huff Po, Atlantic and Vox out there, you should be able to find an article making a case for whatever you want. At least link to that so we know the source of your arguments. Making links to look like you have evidence either makes you look disingenuous or incapable of basic Reason.

    1. It is intellectual vapidity and laziness = the tendency to link to erroneous supporting articles

      This kind of behavior lowers my assessment of Soave's professionalism.

    2. thank you for clicking on their fraudulent links for me.

    3. It is known is an acceptable premise at Reason, especially when discussing the Bad Orange Man.

    4. It's called lying, overt.
      Robby, and Reason generally, are lying.

      1. Robby is far and away the best they have at the moment. And having mostly exorcized the throat clear demons, he is actually generally on point on free speech issues and campus rights issues.

        Doesn't mean I'm not going to call him out when he's full of crap. But I'm going to give credit where credit is due. Other than the jacket, he's the closest thing they have to a libertarian voice. And the jacket isn't around much anymore.

        1. I'm grown up enough to admit I have my biases and I try not to hold them against Robby because of everything you wrote.

          It would be nice if he didn't put turds in his articles though.

        2. More an indictment of Reason than praise for Robbie, but agree.

        3. You are correct, cyto, yet Robby still routinely lies.

    5. "...look disingenuous or incapable of basic Reason."

      I'm leaning towards both.

  15. LOL in six months to a year we'll see "Jan 6 looks like Fedsurrection".

  16. Hang 'em high and hang 'em twice to make sure they're dead.

  17. News just broke - Breyer is retiring from the Supreme Court.

    1. Did he find a horses head in his bed?

      1. No, but he saw a horse’s ass when he visited the Oval Office.

    2. better than to be Pelican Briefed by Brandon

    3. He'd already capsized to port, so a replacement from droolin' Joe isn't likely to change anything

      1. Whoever Biden’s handlers nominate will be far worse.

        1. A vagina-having person of color. And not just any color either!!
          Rather, the rich, milk chocolate color of 30-70% white African-American people, with judges robes and don't you DARE say any of them got where they are through affirmative action, tokenism, quotas or sucking Willie Browns' dick!!

  18. Chambers is no longer slated to participate in the trial.

    This seems like a problem. Can't the defense subpoena him? I think they'd probably be very interested in putting him on the stand, given all that we're learned about him. But if he's somehow being protected from a subpoena, that's quite another thing.

  19. Who is Ray Epps?

      1. Yeah I’ve read that, it’s been posted here several times. It’s a question for people like Robbie and Jeffy.

    1. FBI: Dont ask about that.

  20. It is more persuasive than January 6, but there is still plenty of warning signs that January 6th was not as they would like everyone to believe.

    1. There's probably going to be a point when more evidence comes out about Fed involvement in January 6, when they have prosecute certain individuals. I'm going to predict the FBI involvement is greater than zero, but less than the Whitmer case.

      1. And there are questions about January 6th that go way beyond maybe a rogue FBI office trying to score points using informants. There are questions about why capital police requests were denied in the run up to January 6th. This one question alone points to senior Democrat leadership in the house and Senate.

        There are also questions about what happened that day, outside of people in the crowd. Video evidence sure seems to show that police were removed from their position along the fence facing the crowd immediately before Trump's speech was due to end. That seems like the exact opposite of what one would want to do at the moment when a crowd is about to head your way.

        Like all of the questionable terrorism investigations, Michigan involved only a handful of lawyers and agents. January 6th involves officials across multiple departments And even perhaps from city to federal to capital jurisdictions. That makes it more unbelievable.

        The idea that so many agencies would be involved in some way strains credibility. But, at the same time, we have heard complaints from leadership in the capital police and elsewhere that they were not listened to when they warned of impending problems and requested more resources.

        I don't know. The notion that the crowd had a bunch of agent provocateurs from the FBI or CIA sounds really sketchy. But the notion that Democrat leadership attempted to create a situation where crowds could get out of control so that they could make political hay out of it is not only credible, it seems like the most charitable way to view their actions with respect to capital security.

        1. That being said, there are a few videos of guys urging people to storm the capital that are very difficult to explain as being genuine Trump supporters.

          1. Again, the crowd walked in front of the J Edgar Hoover Building to get from the park to the Capitol complex. Why wouldn't agents just walk out and encourage people to calm the fuck down? Does anyone expect us to believe they were afraid?

            Either they are completely oblivious, or they were told to stay out of it because it they already had agents in the mix.

          2. "...there are a few videos of guys urging people to storm the capital" who are NOT being held with the others, nor charged.

            Although Eps satisfied the rigorous investigation by the FBI by denying he was a plant.
            "No, no, I wasn't working for the FBI that day." he said.
            "Good enough for us." said the FBI investigators, only two of whom were part of his regular golf foursome.

        2. Soave states flatly in the article that there is no evidence of government involvement. Per your points, there is absolutely very good reason to question that based on the parade of oddities you point out.

          And why is Ray Epps not in trouble? When 100s of people are being charged with illegal parading, it is clearly a very good question why the guy caught on video multiple times inciting people to march to and into the capitol is apparently being left alone. There may well be a very good reason for that, but to handwave it as somehow unremarkable defies logic.

          It's a good question that deserves examination, and it makes those doing the handwaving appear to be afraid of confronting something they don't want to be true.

          1. For whatever reason, it appears Reason has settled on a conclusion regarding anything related to the election and 1/6, and any questions that have arisen that don’t fit the official narrative will be ignored.

  21. To be fair, talking someone into kidnapping a governor is a bit more of an ask than talking someone into protesting on public property.

    1. How many people actually assaulted anyone or broke anything? Literally everyone else there was simply engaged in political protest.

      1. IIRC, something like 80+% on J6 are charged with the equivalent of trespass. There are about 150 defendants charged with a range of crimes including actual assault on an officer and then things like "obstructing or interfering with government offices" which can be anything from intentionally trying to block officers from getting to certain parts of the capitol to simply being inconveniently in the way (whether intentional or not), which is very hard not to do when you're in a standing-room-only crowd.

        As for the assaults, I'd love to view the thousands of hours of still unreleased security camera footage to know whether they were the initial aggressor or if they chose to swing (however inadvisedly) at an officer who first shoved, batoned or pepper-sprayed them.

  22. I'm really not getting the "clearly Trump incited a riot" stuff. I mean J6 was so "normal" right? There were some cops attacking the protestors, some protestors escorted by the police to the very top of Capitol hill who then were the most aggressive, some cops who just pulled the barricades back and waved people in.

    Yea so "normal". Also the most filmed (i.e. staged) insurrection ever. Everywhere there are cameras. The "hero" cop who was waved in even had a photographer behind him.

    Yea more "normal"

  23. More J6 "normal". Police and mounted police , tons of them just hanging out by the Smithsonian doing nothing. Little motorcades of cop cars and bike polices criss- crossing the National Mall basically doing nothing.

    Totally normal

  24. Any entrapment in this case or January 6th Insurrection should be laid at the feet of the ex-President. He encouraged this type of behavior. Often asking for the behavior and suggesting that he would pardon individuals. It is only after the fact do, they realize that they are in jail or court and the ex-President is golfing in Florida.

    1. Someone doesn’t know what entrapment means.

      1. He’s stupid, what else would you expect from a democrat?

    2. You think the FBI agents who entrapped Trump supporters did so because they suspected Trump wanted them to and would pardon their behavior? Is this that 4D chess I keep hearing about? That makes zero sense.

  25. Not much evidence in the article for a defense of entrapment. The fact that some witnesses have bad character means nothing unless it's shown they are inveterate liars or have a grudge against a defendant. Still sounds like some yahoos came up with the plan and the government goaded them but did not recruit and propose a kidnapping.

    1. Sure if by Yahoo's you mean the FBI and it's minions, but please go on ignoring the facts and go back to your J6 insurrection delusions.

  26. There are so many unexplained events, like the FBI removing Ray Epps from its most wanted list, the complete failure to identify and find Scaffold Commander and the Pipebomb Guy, the fact that Epps, Scaffold Commander and a number of people with them had identical equipment (megaphones, etc.) all point to the initial breach being a carefully planned event involving coordination with government agencies. An hour later, the people from Trump's rally arrived, saw everything was open and just wandered in. If Reason wants to be taken seriously, it should be doing the kind of investigation that Revolver News has been doing.

  27. I mentioned it in a few replies above, but the J Edgar Hoover building is on Pennsylvania Ave between the White House and the Capitol complex. The crowd literally walked directly in front of FBI headquarters.

    The idea that they didn't have agents there is beyond ludicrous. They media has let it be known that the FBI had at least 2 weeks notice of the event and didn't propose any response. If Robby is going to question anything about 1/6, it should be why didn't the FBI do anything to discourage things from escalating or assist the Capitol police once it did?

    1. Wouldn't it be a good thing if they had infiltrators in the crowd? Not that they managed to stop anything.

      If you're a member of a right-wing group, chances are there are informants about. This is a good thing because right-wing groups are known to blow up federal buildings and such.

      1. Still haven’t watched the videos, have you?

      2. Their goal wasn’t to stop it. Get your head out of your rough trick’s ass and get in the game.

        1. Their goal was to make Trump supporters who happened to show up to express anger at losing an election... more angry?

          1. No. their goal was to get Tony to post stupid shit on reason. Damn, the FBI is good.

  28. Look at libertarian Reason implying that attending a swingers orgy makes one likely to be a criminal.

    By "informants" we usually mean civilian dirtbags who have been persuaded (usually under threat of legal action) to turn on their own. For this to be entrapment, you'd have to show that the non-informant members of the plot were, like, severely mentally retarded.

    I don't know about you, but I'm just simple country folk, and even I know that it's legally frowned upon to kidnap and murder governors, no matter how many rats convince me of what a good idea it would be.

    1. “Look at libertarian Reason implying that attending a swingers orgy makes one likely to be a criminal.”

      Now you see why many of us actual libertarians call them out for not being libertarian. Fuckers got me agreeing with Tony on this one.

    2. Attending a swingers orgy doesn't make you a criminal. Beating your disapproving wife about it does.

      1. I've always had a prejudice against cops and right-wing militias, and in this case it's even hard to tell one from another.

  29. Ironically, with everyone looking the other way, now would be a perfect time to kidnap Whitless.

  30. Attention readers: Because of the author's factual error in portraying the event on January 6th as a 'riot', the entire essay lacks creditability. Sorry!

    I was at the protest on January 6th, with ten of thousands of my closest friends, on the WEST side of the Capital. All of us oblivious to waht few hundred, maybe thousands, of knucleheads were doing on the EAST side of the Capital.

    This was an isolated incident, ane if Reason didn''t get their story lines from CNN, of MSNBC; this would've beeen reported on January 7, 2021.

    Some people did some things , end of story.

  31. FBI and DOJ, totally corrupt, Total stink.

  32. Damn Robby, you almost held the TDS in to the end, but you had to go and blow it.

    You DO realize how absolutely idiotic you sound claiming that J6 had no Feds at the end of an article about Feds being the majority of the Whitmer kidnapping crap, right?

    Regardless of political opinions, you cannot possibly be that naive, so I can only assume you really miss those party invitations and hope your pedantic whoring will earn you a place with the Sophistocrats. Maybe as a lapdog.

    1. Amen. There's clearly too much information suppression to rule out fedl involvement in J6 (given the thousands of ours of CCTV footage not being released and the FBI outright refusing to answer questions about any federal involvement).

      In fact, for Robby to claim there was no federal influence in J6 would require him to trust the very same people he is now suggesting were engaged in entrapment. The feds are the only people claiming there were no feds at J6 (all other media outlets reporting as much source their deneials to the FBI and the J6 committee, which has demonstrated zero actual interest in the matter).

      Robby would be well-served to stick to the facts. Frankly that advice applies to Reason as a whole. They should just focus on the main storyline without these commentary sidebars and jumps to other stories.

      1. News in general is far too much opinion, much of it sponsored.

      2. Just cause there are plenty of crewcut tough guys that work in their day jobs as cops or similar and were there and want trump to win so they can keep cracking liberal skulls does not mean that the whole thing is an official LEO plot.

  33. Round up these future terrorist by whatever means necessary. Would that someone had entrapped that McVeigh idiot before hand.
    The angry white male conservative has become a homeland insurgent, I say ki11 them all!

  34. I wonder what Jussie Smollett thinks about this?

  35. Big Dan: “Everybody down with what’s going on?”
    2nd Agnt: (whispering) “It’s ‘Everybody on with what’s going down?’”
    Big Dan: “Everybody on with what’s going down?”

  36. In this ever changing world that be live in, some things never change.

    In the script of the movie based on Jesse Walter's research into the Ruby Ridge affair, there's a bit of dialogue between Randy Weaver and his son Sammy.
    Sammy: Of course, you don't know who's a government infiltrator and who isn't, do you?
    Randy: Sure, you do. They're the ones that always want you to break the law.

    Then in the US DoJ OIG report on the ATF Good Ole Boys Roundup, the "Liar of the Year" contest winner was a guy who walked out on the flatbed truck stage and said "I'm from the US government and I'm here to help you". The OIG report says that the crowd of hundreds of law enforcement and LE hangers on roared with laughter.

    De ja vue all over again.

    1. " ... that we live in ..."

      It would be nice to have a timed edit option to allow editing a post, timed out only after a reply. Some commentary systems do allow that.

  37. antisense oligonucleotides definition
    https://rna.bocsci.com/products-services/antisense-oligonucleotides-synthesis.html
    BOC RNA provides antisense oligonucleotides (ASOs) synthesis services according to your application to meet the research needs in biology, diagnostics, and drug discovery.

  38. AFM Probe Functionalization
    https://www.matexcel.com/services/afm-probe-functionalization/ Atomic force microscopy (AFM) is a surface characterization instrument which utilizes a tip to “feel” the surface. AFM has great potential as a tool for materials science studies in that it not only is a tool to image the topography of solid surfaces at high resolution,

  39. and one of them has already pleaded guilty and is expected to testify against the rest.

    Translation: Undercover agent being used as bait to pressure the "actual" "kidnappers".

    1. Better translation: "They managed to flip one of them, and he's now a cooperating witness". You're probably a fan of this technique when they use it on drug gangs.

  40. Soave wrote:
    "the Capitol riot is one of the clearer cases of Trump's remarks leading to actual mayhem and violence."

    Everyone who has seen the actual evidence from Jan 5 and 6
    https://www.revolver.news/2022/01/the-essential-revolver-news-january-6-reading-list/
    knows that Soave is a deceitful liar.

  41. Kinda weak sauce in this editorial: "Taken together, these and other details raise the strong possibility that the militia members were victims of entrapment on the part of the FBI."

    Lotsa luck to these hillbillies. I think there's a "strong possibility" that they're well and truly fucked.

  42. 1990 Bonfire of the Vanities, Melanie Griffith, Kim Cattrall, Morgan Freeman, Tom Hanks, Bruce Willis.
    The hunt for the great white bad guy.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.