BOMBSHELL: FBI Finds “Scant Evidence” to Prove That Jan 6 Riot Was “Result Of Organized Plot To Overturn” Election
By: Collin Rugg
The democrat party dystopian narrative has been destroyed. Jan. 6 was almost completely a disorganized mess with people acting on the spur of the moment carried by the emotions of a large crowd and there was never a plan even by those small groups that were determined to get in to do anything once they did get in. The democrats are turning this into a star chamber shoe trial of common citizens swept up into this that are political prisoners being held many months in a jail without trial in solitary confinement and often tortured. It’s time to end the charade and openly confront the democrats false narrative we’ve seen since that date. It’s time to deal with those who assaulted capitol police officers or did major property damage and outright release everyone else. The government of the United States needs to release its political prisoners.
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
BOMBSHELL: FBI Finds “Scant Evidence” to Prove That Jan 6 Riot Was “Result Of Organized Plot To Overturn” Election
by 
Collin Rugg about an hour ago updated 25 minutes ago
NARRATIVE DESTROYED.
According to a bombshell new report from the FBI, they found “scant evidence” that the January 6th Capitol riot was an organized plot to overturn the 2020 election results, a big blow to the Democrats’ agenda.
On Friday, Reuters reported that FBI employees told them “the FBI at this point believes the violence was not centrally coordinated by far-right groups or prominent supporters of then-President Donald Trump, according to the sources, who have been either directly involved in or briefed regularly on the wide-ranging investigations.”
“FBI investigators did find that cells of protesters, including followers of the far-right Oath Keepers and Proud Boys groups, had aimed to break into the Capitol,” the report continued. “But they found no evidence that the groups had serious plans about what to do if they made it inside, the sources said.”
A senior law enforcement official who is now retired, told Reuters that 90-95% of the cases that the DOJ is going after are “one-off cases.” “Then you have five percent, maybe, of these militia groups that were more closely organized,” the former official noted. “But there was no grand scheme with Roger Stone and Alex Jones and all of these people to storm the Capitol and take hostages.”
The FBI also found that President Donald Trump had no involvement in the riot.
“More than 170 people have been charged so far with assaulting or impeding a police officer, according to the Justice Department,” the report stated. “But one source said there has been little, if any, recent discussion by senior Justice Department officials of filing charges such as ‘seditious conspiracy’ to accuse defendants of trying to overthrow the government. They have also opted not to bring racketeering charges, often used against organized criminal gangs.”
It was organized by Trump so... Of course it wasn't organized.
The article explicitly stated very clearly that Trump was not involved with any planning or any of those who planned on entered the capitol building.
It's seeded from an extreme right wing website.
Aw, now you've hit XX's sweet spot.
Which means, as usual, it's full of obvious lies and fascist propaganda.
Another lie disproved!
Exactly. The deep state/ democrat narrative about 1-6-21 has been totally exposed as the fraud that it has been all along.
You seeded an article that specifically says there is an FBI report on this. I will ask you again, what is the name of this alleged FBI report ?
I dont think you will come up with one.
Trending Politics was directly quoting a Reuters article on the same subject that’s linked elsewhere in comments on this thread.
What is the name of the FBI report that your seed says exists? It is a simple question.
The article makes no mention of a report.
It cites a Reuters story, which says in paragraphs 1 and 2:
If you're Friday is going so badly that you're actually doubting Reuters now, then you have my condolences for whatever stress may be causing such poor judgment.
Then you should post the Reuters article. I might read it then. I won't go to Trending Politics. I don't want to support them.
"According to a bombshell new report from the FBI"
If I say that the seeded article contains a reference to an FBI report, it contains a reference to an FBI report. I dont make things up.
Fuck off.
The people from the fake news site that posted the seeded article werent happy enough that Reuters wrote a story based on four un-named FBI sources. They wanted to make it look more official so they said the information was in a "report from the FBI". A "report" from the FBI would be an official document, not four un-named sources.
Like I said, Fuck Off.
What do you think the report means? Does it mean the rioters were tourists? Does it mean that Trump didnt incite the riot? Does it mean members of the mob didnt shout "hang Mike Pence?"
What was Mike Pence role in Congress on Jan 6th ? Why did some of the mob want to hang him?
Why has Trump lied about the election being stolen for almost 10 months?
After you answer all these questions I will answer yours.
So you cant or wont answer the questions. Of course that is the case. Still you are allowed to troll these seeds all day long.
Its a shame.
[deleted]
You have made hundreds if not thousands of [{deleted}] posts on this forum. Do you [really] think no one notices?
Either answer my legitimate questions or dont expect any answers to yours.
The topic is January 6th and I asked you a series of questions about it. You are dancing all around because you either cant or wont answer the questions, yet every minute of every day here you ask other people questions, because, frankly, that is all you are capable of doing.
[removed] All you can do is question what others say.
Except that I watched the whole mob violence thingy unfold live on TV. Heard the violent rhetoric and read all of the far right wing posts that coordinated the attack.
Might as well try to deny the Holocaust or Pearl Harbor.
I can discuss the events of Jan 6th off the top of my head and write paragraphs about it.
You can't even write one sentence.
I asked you 5 or 6 questions that you havent replied to. Whats the problem?
The topic of the seed is Jan 6th.
I asked you a half dozen questions about Jan 6th and you havent answered any of them.
I have enabled your trolling on this seed long enough.
I already did. I go to Reuters and AP and daily to get news. I trust them. I don't trust Trending Politics. They may cite Reuters as a source but they rewrite the stories to suit their agenda.
FBI disagrees with you. That never happened.
I don’t want to support Reuters. We communicate through our own chosen sources as we see fit.
Great post! Well said. The article answers many of the questions being asked of you on its own.
The seeded article answered several questions regarding the days events, it’s lack of planning, what the people would do if they did get in, and the total lack of any connection whatsoever between the President and his associates and the crowd there.
Trump 2024
Trump's acquitted again!
It doesn't matter. The TDS driven have the bit between their teeth. They are going down their Jan 6th rabbit hole to the very end. They need something to at least try and distract voters from the latest Biden crisis in Afghanistan.
Despite all evidence to Nancy's kangaroo court investigation.
Nancy’s kangaroos are relying on emotion as they have no evidence of the things they allege.
Except Ashli Babbitt was killed in cold blood, but they don't want to talk about that.
[removed]
[Deleted]
There’s video of the shooting. You are right.
Relax Vic, not yet.
So you think that the democrat lies in this issue have not yet been fully exposed?
I think that Trending Politics has tried its best to do so, but I remain of little faith when it comes to far right or to far left 'news' sites.
We on the right will have our newer alternative media accepted by the establishment.
Coupled to the same old lies and fascist propaganda.
Sorry but disagreement with you doesn’t make us liars or fascists.
What is the name of this FBI report? If it's an FBI report it has a name.
This just in:
The U.S. Capitol Police force is attempting to shut down a watchdog lawsuit that attempt to gain public access to materials pertaining to the Jan. 6 Capitol breach by arguing such content is "not public records."
In February, watchdog group Judicial Watch filed a lawsuit under the common law right of access to pubic records, after being denied access to any records by the Capitol Police. In January, the group had requested from the force the following:
In response, Capitol Police told the court that footage of the Capitol is "solely for national security and law enforcement purposes," and therefore access to it is limited and controlled by the Capitol Police.
The force goes on to argue that even if the records are public, the interest of the Capitol Police in keeping the records confidential "outweigh any public interest in those materials," according to a release from Judicial Watch.
"Any other police department in America would be investigated and defunded for such abusive secrecy. The Pelosi Congress is in cover-up mode regarding January 6," Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said.
https://justthenews.com/government/courts-law/capitol-police-tell-federal-court-january-6-materials-are-not-public-records?utm_campaign=ligthouse&utm_content=capitol-police-tell-federal-court-january-6-materials-are-not-public-records&utm_source=social-jsr&utm_medium=facebook
Thanks for this. I was going to go to them for supporting info regarding this issue. Great post.
What is the name of the FBI report XX ? Your article from a disreputable source says there is an FBI report. What is the name of that report so we can look it up?
Report is not out yet....read the articles
The liberals just hate what it will say…
Why the runaround when the source of your post is Judicial Watch?
Judicial Watch is rated a conspiracy site on MBFC
For darn sure…
you nailed it!
So what? They do a great job exposing abuses of power by the deep state and by individuals in high places. I’m proud to be loosely affiliated with that group
"So what" to the fact that they are conspiracy nuts? LOL.
Just because the know nothing bigots that are MBFC think that does not make it so. They are openly lying about judicial watch because it targets people and agencies and the deep state that they favor. It’s MBFC that is showing it’s bias here like they do to populist conservatives and evangelical Christians whom they persecute.
Lets see, I've asked you five times for the name of the FBI report, and nothing. Can we assume there is no "FBI report"?
[deleted]
I am sure SPLC lists them as a hate group too.
How often do you ask for reports in officer involved shootings or the Jessie Smollett case.
Because of MBFC we can’t seed directly from many sites we conservatives are indirectly affiliated with or are donors to or members of and have to find alternative ways to get news about their efforts legal in this case. Judicial Watch and Alliance Defending Freedom are almost always in the news because of the cases they take and the people they represent. So while we are banned from seeding items directly from them, they will always be in the news from multiple other sources and proudly mentioned.
I’m proud to be a supporter of and affiliated with a whole bunch of the SPLC’s so called hate groups and wear that label from them as a badge of honor. The SPLC is a scandal ridden racist and misogynistic group that launders money abroad and has no honor whatsoever. No one who follows the SPLC hate rating for most of these mainstream conservative and Christian groups they target have none either.
We should know the name of the cop in the illegitimate Ashli Babbit shooting as well.
Here is the Reuters article.
I recommend trying to post from there. Why allow a seed to be derailed by arguments over the source?
It's a good article which seems to contain facts and not opinions. thanks for bringing it here
You’re welcome.
my thank-you was for Tacos. Don't take credit for his comment. Bad Form
Well I also linked to that same source he did.
I put a link to it in a following post. Trending Politics is one of my favorite news and opinion sites online. It was personal preference. That Trending politics was directly quoting Reuters gives Trending Politics more “credibility” with the lamestream media.
Liberals always attack conservative/alternative new media sites. They and their fact checker allies want a monopoly on the distribution and content of the news and we conservatives are going to keep our newer sites front and center and make them a part of any discussion of national and political issues. Liberals need to realize that when they dialogue and discuss issues with conservatives we are going to come at the discussion from the sources and viewpoints we choose to use or not dialogue at all, even if it means a total division into two Americas News, opinion, and ideologically and no dialogue. Conservatives will ultimately walk away rather than co exist with liberals on a big tech social media site like Twitter or Facebook on their terms.
The “my way or the highway” approach is not persuasive. Find your news where you wish, of course, but if you want to persuade other people, you need to think about how they respond to sources. If they are only focused on your source, they aren’t listening to the point you want to make. You’ll change zero minds.
That’s why I try to seed from - or link to - more neutral sources sometimes. If I’m trying to communicate an idea or story to liberals, I stay away from conservative sources. I try to find the same story somewhere else, and vice versa. That way, we’re talking about the story and not the source.
It’s not my way or the highway. It’s simply a matter of getting the newer alternative media accepted within the dialogue of civil discourse. When the conservative oriented media quotes the lamestream media and links to it or openly mentions it I’m going to use it. Just like in newsvine days I’d seed a story from Fox News or Newsmax and when the progressives complain about the source I’d go back and prove the AP or Reuters origins of the story. They’d then say why not seed from it in the first place. Bottom line is that I don’t care that liberals belly ache about the source. They need to realize that they will have to accept our sources as much as they want us to accept theirs. Mainstreaming conservative sites into the broad political dialogue is an important objective. I have on occasion used lamestream and even liberal sources to make a certain point.
An example of a Thomson/Reuters article on this very issue from Newsmax.
Why is this a "bombshell" news item ? It certainly doesn't lessen the atrocity of what happened on 1/6/2021.
Probably should direct that question to the actual author of the article
Who do you think I was addressing ?
Well then you should probably click on one of the Reuters links in the comments and find the author of it then and ask them. Doubt the writer for Reuters is a member here.
How 'bout this, I'm asking anyone who cares to answer.
And it really doesn't concern you.
He answered you.
It concerned him.
I thought that he answered the question quite well.
A minor riot is an atrocity?
And all the riots, looting, arson, vandalism, injury to hundreds of police officers, other violence of BLM/Antifa domestic terrorists late May last year onward were “mostly peaceful”.
It does prove that there was never an attempt to do anything to anyone or to prevent government from working once they were inside and that most simply walked around and stayed within the velvet rope lines. It also proves that there was no link of Trump to any of these people who entered the capitol.
As if facts will get in the way of their conspiracies.
All you have to do is look at the indictments to realize what a fantasy the left has been peddling about January 6th. Just nonsense about insurrection. It's the same as the whole Mueller craze. They made all sorts of batshit crazy claims about what Mueller knew and would prove and then when you actually read the indictments you realize how demented they were .
The bottom line. Well said.
No one who engages in politics is short of "batshit crazy claims".
Why was the mob bashing down the door leading directly to the House Of Representatives chambers ? You dont believe they found that door by accident do you?
At a minimum, the mob intended to try and personally intimidate the legislators into refusing to certify the electoral count that day.
The "mob" had no plan or direction
That is the bottom line. It was mostly a bunch of people swept up in the moment by the handful of agitators who planned to get in to protest indoors but had no thought out plan to do anything beyond that once inside.
How does it feel to be proven perpetually wrong?
Does it ever sink in that your narrative just doesn't fit the facts?
Care to discuss why Garland and DOJ are releasing the BLM and Antifa rioters; and yet have the FBI hunting down the Jan 6th rioters; have them sitting in prison w/o charging them; and trying to prosecute them to the fullest extent of the law? Both attacked federal Officers; and both are guilty of destruction of federal property. Of course only one side was using Molotov Cocktails; committed arson; looting; and murder. But I guess those things get a pass in our new two tier justice system.
I do not humor your delusions if I can help it.
They wanted to go into the House and Senate chambers to intimidate the congresspeople who were voting on the election results.
Outside the door where Ashley Babbitt was killed there is a signage indicating it is leading to the Speaker's Lobby.
The mob intended to end up there, of course , and they tried to bash the door down to get in.
Many of the riot ringleaders had been taken on reconnaissance tours of the building in the days before the attack by GOP Rep. Lauren Boebert.
This is the location where Ashley babbitt was killed
The two middle doors are open in this photo , but on Jan 6th they were closed locked and barricaded. The middle door on the right was bashed in and that is where Babbitt started to climb through. The guard that killed her was off to the left on the other side.
If you look farther down the hallway you see a doorway on the left which appears to be about 20 ft or so from where Babbitt was killed. This is a view of that door from the hallway.
That doorway, as you can see leads directly to the House Chamber.
So had Ashley Babbitt and her fellow mob members been allowed through, in a matter of seconds they would have been in the House of Representatives.
They knew where they were trying to go and they knew what they wanted to do there.
No excuses for the without any warning execution shot. It was clearly a major case of excessive force.
Well of course it wasn’t organized, who the fuck thought that? I mean look at those idiots, they were just wandering around with their thumbs up their asses. They didn’t actually expect to get into the building, and there was even less of a plan once they got inside than they had when they were outside.
Ot was a total cluster fuck, like everything “trump”.
Some of them knew where they were going. They are seen in various videos checking out the signage on doors as they looked for the Senate and House chambers where they intended to confront the Congresspeople.