Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

I stopped checking the links after a dozen.

---

Fair enough. I stopped reading there.

---

Ironically proving a point I made further in my post.

---

So not reading proves a point...but only when I do it.

QED.

---

OK, tell you what. I will go through the rest of the links, while you read and consider my points, in toto.

Deal?

---

Sure!

---

Having responded to Sam's 41 links as promised, I am looking forward to see how Sam keeps his end of the agreement, especially in light of how he has posted in this thread since we made that agreement .

---

Well, I don't think I lump Trump supporters into a group, at least no more than anyone else does when we talk about groups of people (Republicans, Democrats, etc.). I'm not surprised enough by Trump's behavior to feel bitter about it. I hoped he would do better, but I've always found him sleazy and immature. I knew as much when I voted for him, so I have to take responsibility for that. I think the tone of my posts depends greatly on the tone of the person I'm talking to. Not that that's a particularly good thing. I try to be charitable no matter what the other person does. I often fail. But it has very little to do with what people believe or whom they support. Quash and I probably disagree on more issues than you and I do, but we rarely if ever get crosswise. Shippou probably has the most repulsive ideas on the board, from my point of view, but I don't find him repulsive as a person. It really just depends on how reasonable one is willing to be.

---

So while I took the time to examine and review all forty-one of your links, considering them in context both of the time and now, you tossed out a word salad basically ignored everything I said because you don't want to be bothered with anything that might not support your original opinion.

Noted.

---

I was responding to your post from 9:00 PM on 5/27/22, as requested. I don't even know what you're arguing about or what opinion you think I'm trying to support. I'm just setting the record straight on the Mueller investigation and the first impeachment, during which I did defend Trump. Consistently.

---

A disappointing cop out, Sam. You know what we agreed to. You welched.

Oldbear83 said:

---

I stopped checking the links after a dozen. I found a couple which defended Trump, but mostly you went after Obama and the Democrats. Fair, but not quite what we were discussing.

I do think it is still reasonable to say that somewhere mid 2020 you lost faith in Trump, and like a broken infatuation your opinion spiraled from approval to distaste and bitterness.

I also think you began pooling everyone who supports the former President in one lump, so as to deride them regardless of specifics. Ironically, this means that you get into arguments with people who might otherwise agree with you to some degree about Trump's temper, sometimes foolish desire to butt into issues he should leave alone, and/or his desire to have complete support in whatever fight he picks.

I am frankly amused to see you use the word "evidence", because you still ignore evidence if it does not suit your argument. That certainly is a common behavior, especially among lawyers (I just won a judgment in Pennsylvania, because the defense attorney believed the judge was not serious when he warned that failure to appear at a mandatory arbitration could lead to a summary judgment against the party not in attendance), but for here it dilutes someone's credibility to build a house on sand, which is to say, base a claim on just the parts you like and ignore whatever does not fit.

I am presently working on a project which may or may not bear fruit. In 2020 the key states had polls which disagreed, even in the final days, about whether Trump or Biden would win. For a time I wondered if the mail-in ballots made it impossible to accurately predict the outcome, but I now think it maybe useful to look at the accuracy of those polls in 2012, 2016, and 2020 to help see the starting picture for 2024.

Certainly the primary results in Georgia are food for thought, but no more than Texas and other states where Trump-supported candidates won. I also plan to look at the exit poll demographics from Pennsylvania, where the recount between Trump-supported Oz and Trump-hater McCormick illustrates the divide among GOP voters. By the way, you may already know this, but if Oz wins the Senate seat he would be the first Muslim to serve as a United States Senator.

in any case, thanks for your links, even if I disagree a bit about what they show.

---

Just for reference, this is the post you promised to answer.

Not sure why it's too much for you.

As for 'defending' Trump, as I noted in a very detailed post, I found clear defense for Trump in 10 of the 41 links and apologized to that extent for having forgotten those,

But all of those links are more than 2 years old, and 31 of the 41 links are not so much defense of Trump as attacks on other people, like Clinton, Strzok, and Mueller. Worthwhile reading but not a literal defense of the President.

Again, not sure why that fact would bother you. Ten clear links defending Trump still count, even if they highlight the change in your opinion since those posts.

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam: "Well, I don't think I lump Trump supporters into a group":

You damn well do. You have harangued me for supporting Trump in the January 6 matter, falsely pretending I am one of his strongest supporters. The fact, Sam, is that like you I detested Trump personally and opposed his original candidacy, voting for Trump only in the General Election because of the unacceptable alternative.

I judged Trump's work as President solely according to his policies and results, and those make clear he was the best choice for support in 2020.

You have said yourself that the Democrats spent years trying to demonize Trump, making up story after story in hopes something would eventually stick.

And somewhere along the line, you turned against Trump and started buying into the garbage. Maybe it was the the COVID response, and maybe it was Trump's personality, but you do lump everyone who defends Trump's record and work.

Would I like to have other choices for the GOP nomination in 2024? Of course. Even with his successful work, Trump's personality is an issue, and his age is likely to interfere with his work. But I won't buy lies about him just because some folks sell the story, and I can see that the top job right now has to be replacing the Democrats in every arm of government. Trump 2.0 is well above anything the Democrats will offer.

I don't know about your line of work, Sam, but some of the people I work with are unpleasant, even jerks, but they know their job and they get the results, legal and clean. Trump does the same, at least so far as every investigation up to now has been able to determine.

---

Congratulations for recognizing that Trump has an obnoxious personality. You're not the first. Neither that nor the fact that he was demonized gives him a free pass for the more substantive abuses of which he is guilty. If you think he's innocent, it all goes back to the evidence...which is the only thing that matters anyway.

Yet another cop out.

I apologized for a mistake. It's sadly obvious you cannot do the same, Sam.


A pity.

Oldbear83 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

I stopped checking the links after a dozen. I found a couple which defended Trump, but mostly you went after Obama and the Democrats. Fair, but not quite what we were discussing.

I do think it is still reasonable to say that somewhere mid 2020 you lost faith in Trump, and like a broken infatuation your opinion spiraled from approval to distaste and bitterness.

I also think you began pooling everyone who supports the former President in one lump, so as to deride them regardless of specifics. Ironically, this means that you get into arguments with people who might otherwise agree with you to some degree about Trump's temper, sometimes foolish desire to butt into issues he should leave alone, and/or his desire to have complete support in whatever fight he picks.

I am frankly amused to see you use the word "evidence", because you still ignore evidence if it does not suit your argument. That certainly is a common behavior, especially among lawyers (I just won a judgment in Pennsylvania, because the defense attorney believed the judge was not serious when he warned that failure to appear at a mandatory arbitration could lead to a summary judgment against the party not in attendance), but for here it dilutes someone's credibility to build a house on sand, which is to say, base a claim on just the parts you like and ignore whatever does not fit.

I am presently working on a project which may or may not bear fruit. In 2020 the key states had polls which disagreed, even in the final days, about whether Trump or Biden would win. For a time I wondered if the mail-in ballots made it impossible to accurately predict the outcome, but I now think it maybe useful to look at the accuracy of those polls in 2012, 2016, and 2020 to help see the starting picture for 2024.

Certainly the primary results in Georgia are food for thought, but no more than Texas and other states where Trump-supported candidates won. I also plan to look at the exit poll demographics from Pennsylvania, where the recount between Trump-supported Oz and Trump-hater McCormick illustrates the divide among GOP voters. By the way, you may already know this, but if Oz wins the Senate seat he would be the first Muslim to serve as a United States Senator.

in any case, thanks for your links, even if I disagree a bit about what they show.

---

Just for reference, this is the post you promised to answer.

Not sure why it's too much for you.

As for 'defending' Trump, as I noted in a very detailed post, I found clear defense for Trump in 10 of the 41 links and apologized to that extent for having forgotten those,

But all of those links are more than 2 years old, and 31 of the 41 links are not so much defense of Trump as attacks on other people, like Clinton, Strzok, and Mueller. Worthwhile reading but not a literal defense of the President.

Again, not sure why that fact would bother you. Ten clear links defending Trump still count, even if they highlight the change in your opinion since those posts.

---

Well, I'm not sure why it would bother you either. The posts criticizing Mueller and friends are obviously in the context of defending Trump, but if you don't think they measure up then feel free to think whatever. My point remains. As for the rest of it, I'll say again that I've never really admired Trump and don't feel any bitterness or much of anything else about him as a person. I'm not very interested in polls, either, so I don't have anything to say about your project. Good luck with it.

Wow, you gave that what, 30 seconds of attention?

The cop out continues ...

Oldbear83 said:

---

Wow, you gave that what, 30 seconds of attention?

The cop out continues ...

---

What do you want from me, because I seriously have no idea.

Sam Lowry said:

---

The committee investigated your "infiltrator" and determined that he didn't work for the FBI

---

What is his name and what has he been charged with and when was he arrested?

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The committee investigated your "infiltrator" and determined that he didn't work for the FBI

---

What is his name and what has he been charged with and when was he arrested?

---

And here come the conspiracy theories...

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The committee investigated your "infiltrator" and determined that he didn't work for the FBI

---

What is his name and what has he been charged with and when was he arrested?

---

And here come the conspiracy theories...

---

he clearly on video did bad things.. why no charges? This isnt a conspiracy theory, it is fact. He is on video on jan 5th and jan 6th promoting storming the capital yet no charges..

Come on Sam, this is a slam dunk win for the Jan 6 prosecution based on the evidence

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The committee investigated your "infiltrator" and determined that he didn't work for the FBI

---

What is his name and what has he been charged with and when was he arrested?

---

And here come the conspiracy theories...

---

he clearly on video did bad things.. why no charges? This isnt a conspiracy theory, it is fact. He is on video on jan 5th and jan 6th promoting storming the capital yet no charges..

Come on Sam, this is a slam dunk win for the Jan 6 prosecution based on the evidence

---

Come on man. Agents & employees of the Deep State get out of jail free. Everyone knows that

Osodecentx said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The committee investigated your "infiltrator" and determined that he didn't work for the FBI

---

What is his name and what has he been charged with and when was he arrested?

---

And here come the conspiracy theories...

---

he clearly on video did bad things.. why no charges? This isnt a conspiracy theory, it is fact. He is on video on jan 5th and jan 6th promoting storming the capital yet no charges..

Come on Sam, this is a slam dunk win for the Jan 6 prosecution based on the evidence

---

Come on man. Agents & employees of the Deep State get out of jail free. Everyone knows that

---

much truth in your sarcastic remark..

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The committee investigated your "infiltrator" and determined that he didn't work for the FBI

---

What is his name and what has he been charged with and when was he arrested?

---

And here come the conspiracy theories...

---

he clearly on video did bad things.. why no charges? This isnt a conspiracy theory, it is fact. He is on video on jan 5th and jan 6th promoting storming the capital yet no charges..

Come on Sam, this is a slam dunk win for the Jan 6 prosecution based on the evidence

---

There were a lot of people there. The government isn't obligated to prosecute all of them just to prove they're not FBI agents. This guy apparently never entered the building and was trying to de-escalate confrontation with the police. They'd have to prosecute him solely based on his speech, which is always tricky.

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The committee investigated your "infiltrator" and determined that he didn't work for the FBI

---

What is his name and what has he been charged with and when was he arrested?

---

And here come the conspiracy theories...

---

he clearly on video did bad things.. why no charges? This isnt a conspiracy theory, it is fact. He is on video on jan 5th and jan 6th promoting storming the capital yet no charges..

Come on Sam, this is a slam dunk win for the Jan 6 prosecution based on the evidence

---

There were a lot of people there. The government isn't obligated to prosecute all of them just to prove they're not FBI agents. This guy apparently never entered the building and was trying to de-escalate confrontation with the police. They'd have to prosecute him solely based on his speech, which is always tricky.

---

..so the guys in golf carts that didnt enter the building are cool right?

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The committee investigated your "infiltrator" and determined that he didn't work for the FBI

---

What is his name and what has he been charged with and when was he arrested?

---

And here come the conspiracy theories...

---

he clearly on video did bad things.. why no charges? This isnt a conspiracy theory, it is fact. He is on video on jan 5th and jan 6th promoting storming the capital yet no charges..

Come on Sam, this is a slam dunk win for the Jan 6 prosecution based on the evidence

---

There were a lot of people there. The government isn't obligated to prosecute all of them just to prove they're not FBI agents. This guy apparently never entered the building and was trying to de-escalate confrontation with the police. They'd have to prosecute him solely based on his speech, which is always tricky.

---

..so the guys in golf carts that didnt enter the building are cool right?

---

They're charged with much more serious crimes than trespassing.

May 27, 9:00 PM
I ask Sam as series of questions
https://sicem365.com/forums/7/topics/106285/replies/2742123

May 27, 954 PM
Sam agrees to answer them if I go through his links
https://sicem365.com/forums/7/topics/106285/replies/2742161

May 29, 958 PM
I answer Sam's links in detail, and include an apology for ten specific defenses of Trump I had forgotten
https://sicem365.com/forums/7/topics/106285/replies/2743197

May 30, 1148 AM
Sam pops off a false claim, does not respond to my questions from May 27
https://sicem365.com/forums/7/topics/106285/replies/2743453

May 30, 1216 PM
Sam again makes a snide comment, again ignores his promise to respond to my May 27 post
https://sicem365.com/forums/7/topics/106285/replies/2743499

May 30, 1227 PM
Sam again pursues a tangent, does not respond to the May 27 questions despite his promise
https://sicem365.com/forums/7/topics/106285/replies/2743521

May 30, 726 PM
Sam finally responds, but only to repeat that he does not like Trump, throw in some virtue signaling and falsely claim that he does not lump Trump supporters together, for some reason thinking that his courtesy to quash somehow proves that claim (?)
Does not respond to anything in my May 27 post.

https://sicem365.com/forums/7/topics/106285/replies/2743905

May 30, 925 PM

Sam: "What do you want from me, because I seriously have no idea."

Sam has even forgotten what he promised. Anything that gets in the way of his whims gets tossed into a memory hole.

https://sicem365.com/forums/7/topics/106285/replies/2743970

This is what Sam has become.

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The committee investigated your "infiltrator" and determined that he didn't work for the FBI

---

What is his name and what has he been charged with and when was he arrested?

---

And here come the conspiracy theories...

---

he clearly on video did bad things.. why no charges? This isnt a conspiracy theory, it is fact. He is on video on jan 5th and jan 6th promoting storming the capital yet no charges..

Come on Sam, this is a slam dunk win for the Jan 6 prosecution based on the evidence

---

There were a lot of people there. The government isn't obligated to prosecute all of them just to prove they're not FBI agents. This guy apparently never entered the building and was trying to de-escalate confrontation with the police. They'd have to prosecute him solely based on his speech, which is always tricky.

---

..so the guys in golf carts that didnt enter the building are cool right?

---

They're charged with much more serious crimes than trespassing.

---

who said anything about tresspassing.. dude is on video talking about storming the capital

Thats on par with the golf cart boys who didnt go into the capital

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The committee investigated your "infiltrator" and determined that he didn't work for the FBI

---

What is his name and what has he been charged with and when was he arrested?

---

And here come the conspiracy theories...

---

he clearly on video did bad things.. why no charges? This isnt a conspiracy theory, it is fact. He is on video on jan 5th and jan 6th promoting storming the capital yet no charges..

Come on Sam, this is a slam dunk win for the Jan 6 prosecution based on the evidence

---

There were a lot of people there. The government isn't obligated to prosecute all of them just to prove they're not FBI agents. This guy apparently never entered the building and was trying to de-escalate confrontation with the police. They'd have to prosecute him solely based on his speech, which is always tricky.

---

..so the guys in golf carts that didnt enter the building are cool right?

---

They're charged with much more serious crimes than trespassing.

---

who said anything about tresspassing.. dude is on video talking about storming the capital

Thats on par with the golf cart boys who didnt go into the capital

---

I think he was talking about peacefully going into the Capitol to protest. The golf cart guys were conspiring to stop the votes from being counted and stockpiling weapons in aid of that plan.

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The committee investigated your "infiltrator" and determined that he didn't work for the FBI

---

What is his name and what has he been charged with and when was he arrested?

---

And here come the conspiracy theories...

---

he clearly on video did bad things.. why no charges? This isnt a conspiracy theory, it is fact. He is on video on jan 5th and jan 6th promoting storming the capital yet no charges..

Come on Sam, this is a slam dunk win for the Jan 6 prosecution based on the evidence

---

There were a lot of people there. The government isn't obligated to prosecute all of them just to prove they're not FBI agents. This guy apparently never entered the building and was trying to de-escalate confrontation with the police. They'd have to prosecute him solely based on his speech, which is always tricky.

---

..so the guys in golf carts that didnt enter the building are cool right?

---

They're charged with much more serious crimes than trespassing.

---

who said anything about tresspassing.. dude is on video talking about storming the capital

Thats on par with the golf cart boys who didnt go into the capital

---

I think he was talking about peacefully going into the Capitol to protest. The golf cart guys were conspiring to stop the votes from being counted and stockpiling weapons in aid of that plan.

---

have you watched the videos? You wouldnt draw that conclusion if you did..

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The committee investigated your "infiltrator" and determined that he didn't work for the FBI

---

What is his name and what has he been charged with and when was he arrested?

---

And here come the conspiracy theories...

---

he clearly on video did bad things.. why no charges? This isnt a conspiracy theory, it is fact. He is on video on jan 5th and jan 6th promoting storming the capital yet no charges..

Come on Sam, this is a slam dunk win for the Jan 6 prosecution based on the evidence

---

There were a lot of people there. The government isn't obligated to prosecute all of them just to prove they're not FBI agents. This guy apparently never entered the building and was trying to de-escalate confrontation with the police. They'd have to prosecute him solely based on his speech, which is always tricky.

---

..so the guys in golf carts that didnt enter the building are cool right?

---

They're charged with much more serious crimes than trespassing.

---

who said anything about tresspassing.. dude is on video talking about storming the capital

Thats on par with the golf cart boys who didnt go into the capital

---

I think he was talking about peacefully going into the Capitol to protest. The golf cart guys were conspiring to stop the votes from being counted and stockpiling weapons in aid of that plan.

---

have you watched the videos? You wouldnt draw that conclusion if you did..

---

No, just read about it.

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The committee investigated your "infiltrator" and determined that he didn't work for the FBI

---

What is his name and what has he been charged with and when was he arrested?

---

And here come the conspiracy theories...

---

he clearly on video did bad things.. why no charges? This isnt a conspiracy theory, it is fact. He is on video on jan 5th and jan 6th promoting storming the capital yet no charges..

Come on Sam, this is a slam dunk win for the Jan 6 prosecution based on the evidence

---

There were a lot of people there. The government isn't obligated to prosecute all of them just to prove they're not FBI agents. This guy apparently never entered the building and was trying to de-escalate confrontation with the police. They'd have to prosecute him solely based on his speech, which is always tricky.

---

..so the guys in golf carts that didnt enter the building are cool right?

---

They're charged with much more serious crimes than trespassing.

---

who said anything about tresspassing.. dude is on video talking about storming the capital

Thats on par with the golf cart boys who didnt go into the capital

---

I think he was talking about peacefully going into the Capitol to protest. The golf cart guys were conspiring to stop the votes from being counted and stockpiling weapons in aid of that plan.

---

have you watched the videos? You wouldnt draw that conclusion if you did..

---

No, just read about it.

---

How many January 6th protesters were actually working for the federal government? In October, I asked AG Garland while he was under oath and he refused to answer. He looked very nervous and worried when I showed him this video in that hearing.pic.twitter.com/lvd9n4mMHK

— Thomas Massie (@RepThomasMassie) December 30, 2021

"We need to go into the capital"

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The committee investigated your "infiltrator" and determined that he didn't work for the FBI

---

What is his name and what has he been charged with and when was he arrested?

---

And here come the conspiracy theories...

---

he clearly on video did bad things.. why no charges? This isnt a conspiracy theory, it is fact. He is on video on jan 5th and jan 6th promoting storming the capital yet no charges..

Come on Sam, this is a slam dunk win for the Jan 6 prosecution based on the evidence

---

There were a lot of people there. The government isn't obligated to prosecute all of them just to prove they're not FBI agents. This guy apparently never entered the building and was trying to de-escalate confrontation with the police. They'd have to prosecute him solely based on his speech, which is always tricky.

---

..so the guys in golf carts that didnt enter the building are cool right?

---

They're charged with much more serious crimes than trespassing.

---

who said anything about tresspassing.. dude is on video talking about storming the capital

Thats on par with the golf cart boys who didnt go into the capital

---

I think he was talking about peacefully going into the Capitol to protest. The golf cart guys were conspiring to stop the votes from being counted and stockpiling weapons in aid of that plan.

---

have you watched the videos? You wouldnt draw that conclusion if you did..

---

No, just read about it.

---

How many January 6th protesters were actually working for the federal government? In October, I asked AG Garland while he was under oath and he refused to answer. He looked very nervous and worried when I showed him this video in that hearing.pic.twitter.com/lvd9n4mMHK

— Thomas Massie (@RepThomasMassie) December 30, 2021

"We need to go into the capital"

---

"Peacefully."

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The committee investigated your "infiltrator" and determined that he didn't work for the FBI

---

What is his name and what has he been charged with and when was he arrested?

---

And here come the conspiracy theories...

---

he clearly on video did bad things.. why no charges? This isnt a conspiracy theory, it is fact. He is on video on jan 5th and jan 6th promoting storming the capital yet no charges..

Come on Sam, this is a slam dunk win for the Jan 6 prosecution based on the evidence

---

There were a lot of people there. The government isn't obligated to prosecute all of them just to prove they're not FBI agents. This guy apparently never entered the building and was trying to de-escalate confrontation with the police. They'd have to prosecute him solely based on his speech, which is always tricky.

---

..so the guys in golf carts that didnt enter the building are cool right?

---

They're charged with much more serious crimes than trespassing.

---

who said anything about tresspassing.. dude is on video talking about storming the capital

Thats on par with the golf cart boys who didnt go into the capital

---

I think he was talking about peacefully going into the Capitol to protest. The golf cart guys were conspiring to stop the votes from being counted and stockpiling weapons in aid of that plan.

---

have you watched the videos? You wouldnt draw that conclusion if you did..

---

No, just read about it.

---

How many January 6th protesters were actually working for the federal government? In October, I asked AG Garland while he was under oath and he refused to answer. He looked very nervous and worried when I showed him this video in that hearing.pic.twitter.com/lvd9n4mMHK

— Thomas Massie (@RepThomasMassie) December 30, 2021

"We need to go into the capital"

---

"Peacefully."

---

"into" aka past the barricades and police..

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The committee investigated your "infiltrator" and determined that he didn't work for the FBI

---

What is his name and what has he been charged with and when was he arrested?

---

And here come the conspiracy theories...

---

he clearly on video did bad things.. why no charges? This isnt a conspiracy theory, it is fact. He is on video on jan 5th and jan 6th promoting storming the capital yet no charges..

Come on Sam, this is a slam dunk win for the Jan 6 prosecution based on the evidence

---

There were a lot of people there. The government isn't obligated to prosecute all of them just to prove they're not FBI agents. This guy apparently never entered the building and was trying to de-escalate confrontation with the police. They'd have to prosecute him solely based on his speech, which is always tricky.

---

..so the guys in golf carts that didnt enter the building are cool right?

---

They're charged with much more serious crimes than trespassing.

---

who said anything about tresspassing.. dude is on video talking about storming the capital

Thats on par with the golf cart boys who didnt go into the capital

---

I think he was talking about peacefully going into the Capitol to protest. The golf cart guys were conspiring to stop the votes from being counted and stockpiling weapons in aid of that plan.

---

have you watched the videos? You wouldnt draw that conclusion if you did..

---

No, just read about it.

---

How many January 6th protesters were actually working for the federal government? In October, I asked AG Garland while he was under oath and he refused to answer. He looked very nervous and worried when I showed him this video in that hearing.pic.twitter.com/lvd9n4mMHK

— Thomas Massie (@RepThomasMassie) December 30, 2021

"We need to go into the capital"

---

"Peacefully."

---

Maybe he means this guy:

"Donohoe pushed forward to advance up the concrete stairs toward the Capitol. The crowd overwhelmed law enforcement who were attempting to stop their advance." About 140 police officers were injured during the onslaught, and five people died in the attack or immediate aftermath.

Osodecentx said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The committee investigated your "infiltrator" and determined that he didn't work for the FBI

---

What is his name and what has he been charged with and when was he arrested?

---

And here come the conspiracy theories...

---

he clearly on video did bad things.. why no charges? This isnt a conspiracy theory, it is fact. He is on video on jan 5th and jan 6th promoting storming the capital yet no charges..

Come on Sam, this is a slam dunk win for the Jan 6 prosecution based on the evidence

---

There were a lot of people there. The government isn't obligated to prosecute all of them just to prove they're not FBI agents. This guy apparently never entered the building and was trying to de-escalate confrontation with the police. They'd have to prosecute him solely based on his speech, which is always tricky.

---

..so the guys in golf carts that didnt enter the building are cool right?

---

They're charged with much more serious crimes than trespassing.

---

who said anything about tresspassing.. dude is on video talking about storming the capital

Thats on par with the golf cart boys who didnt go into the capital

---

I think he was talking about peacefully going into the Capitol to protest. The golf cart guys were conspiring to stop the votes from being counted and stockpiling weapons in aid of that plan.

---

have you watched the videos? You wouldnt draw that conclusion if you did..

---

No, just read about it.

---

How many January 6th protesters were actually working for the federal government? In October, I asked AG Garland while he was under oath and he refused to answer. He looked very nervous and worried when I showed him this video in that hearing.pic.twitter.com/lvd9n4mMHK

— Thomas Massie (@RepThomasMassie) December 30, 2021

"We need to go into the capital"

---

"Peacefully."

---

Maybe he means this guy:

"Donohoe pushed forward to advance up the concrete stairs toward the Capitol. The crowd overwhelmed law enforcement who were attempting to stop their advance." About 140 police officers were injured during the onslaught, and five people died in the attack or immediate aftermath.

---

sounds peaceful

4th and Inches said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The committee investigated your "infiltrator" and determined that he didn't work for the FBI

---

What is his name and what has he been charged with and when was he arrested?

---

And here come the conspiracy theories...

---

he clearly on video did bad things.. why no charges? This isnt a conspiracy theory, it is fact. He is on video on jan 5th and jan 6th promoting storming the capital yet no charges..

Come on Sam, this is a slam dunk win for the Jan 6 prosecution based on the evidence

---

There were a lot of people there. The government isn't obligated to prosecute all of them just to prove they're not FBI agents. This guy apparently never entered the building and was trying to de-escalate confrontation with the police. They'd have to prosecute him solely based on his speech, which is always tricky.

---

..so the guys in golf carts that didnt enter the building are cool right?

---

They're charged with much more serious crimes than trespassing.

---

who said anything about tresspassing.. dude is on video talking about storming the capital

Thats on par with the golf cart boys who didnt go into the capital

---

I think he was talking about peacefully going into the Capitol to protest. The golf cart guys were conspiring to stop the votes from being counted and stockpiling weapons in aid of that plan.

---

have you watched the videos? You wouldnt draw that conclusion if you did..

---

No, just read about it.

---

How many January 6th protesters were actually working for the federal government? In October, I asked AG Garland while he was under oath and he refused to answer. He looked very nervous and worried when I showed him this video in that hearing.pic.twitter.com/lvd9n4mMHK

— Thomas Massie (@RepThomasMassie) December 30, 2021

"We need to go into the capital"

---

"Peacefully."

---

Maybe he means this guy:

"Donohoe pushed forward to advance up the concrete stairs toward the Capitol. The crowd overwhelmed law enforcement who were attempting to stop their advance." About 140 police officers were injured during the onslaught, and five people died in the attack or immediate aftermath.

---

sounds peaceful

---

You know that's not what I'm saying. Just saying I can see why they might have chosen not to prosecute Epps.

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The committee investigated your "infiltrator" and determined that he didn't work for the FBI

---

What is his name and what has he been charged with and when was he arrested?

---

And here come the conspiracy theories...

---

he clearly on video did bad things.. why no charges? This isnt a conspiracy theory, it is fact. He is on video on jan 5th and jan 6th promoting storming the capital yet no charges..

Come on Sam, this is a slam dunk win for the Jan 6 prosecution based on the evidence

---

There were a lot of people there. The government isn't obligated to prosecute all of them just to prove they're not FBI agents. This guy apparently never entered the building and was trying to de-escalate confrontation with the police. They'd have to prosecute him solely based on his speech, which is always tricky.

---

The FBI visited (separately, simultaneously) the offices to a husband/wife pair here in Waco who attended the Trump Rally on the mall, started walking toward Congress, but age & neuropathy soon got the better of them. So they took a selfie with the Capitol building off in the distance and headed for the Metro, thence motel & car and left the DC area that day.

FBI showed them a copy of that selfie the took and asked them what they were doing in the Capitol that day.

They are investigating every single person who left a digital signal in WDC that day.

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The committee investigated your "infiltrator" and determined that he didn't work for the FBI

---

What is his name and what has he been charged with and when was he arrested?

---

And here come the conspiracy theories...

---

he clearly on video did bad things.. why no charges? This isnt a conspiracy theory, it is fact. He is on video on jan 5th and jan 6th promoting storming the capital yet no charges..

Come on Sam, this is a slam dunk win for the Jan 6 prosecution based on the evidence

---

There were a lot of people there. The government isn't obligated to prosecute all of them just to prove they're not FBI agents. This guy apparently never entered the building and was trying to de-escalate confrontation with the police. They'd have to prosecute him solely based on his speech, which is always tricky.

---

The FBI visited (separately, simultaneously) the offices to a husband/wife pair here in Waco who attended the Trump Rally on the mall, started walking toward Congress, but age & neuropathy soon got the better of them. So they took a selfie with the Capitol building off in the distance and headed for the Metro, thence motel & car and left the DC area that day.

FBI showed them a copy of that selfie the took and asked them what they were doing in the Capitol that day.

They are investigating every single person who left a digital signal in WDC that day.

---

Yes, and presumably they investigated your guy at some point while he was on a list of unidentified suspects and before they decided he wasn't worth pursuing. Just like they did with who knows how many others. All of that adds up to exactly zero evidence that he worked for the FBI. It was a rumor that took off on social media because you and others needed it to be true.

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The committee investigated your "infiltrator" and determined that he didn't work for the FBI

---

What is his name and what has he been charged with and when was he arrested?

---

And here come the conspiracy theories...

---

he clearly on video did bad things.. why no charges? This isnt a conspiracy theory, it is fact. He is on video on jan 5th and jan 6th promoting storming the capital yet no charges..

Come on Sam, this is a slam dunk win for the Jan 6 prosecution based on the evidence

---

There were a lot of people there. The government isn't obligated to prosecute all of them just to prove they're not FBI agents. This guy apparently never entered the building and was trying to de-escalate confrontation with the police. They'd have to prosecute him solely based on his speech, which is always tricky.

---

The FBI visited (separately, simultaneously) the offices to a husband/wife pair here in Waco who attended the Trump Rally on the mall, started walking toward Congress, but age & neuropathy soon got the better of them. So they took a selfie with the Capitol building off in the distance and headed for the Metro, thence motel & car and left the DC area that day.

FBI showed them a copy of that selfie the took and asked them what they were doing in the Capitol that day.

They are investigating every single person who left a digital signal in WDC that day.

---

Yes, and presumably they investigated your guy at some point while he was on a list of unidentified suspects and before they decided he wasn't worth pursuing. Just like they did with who knows how many others. All of that adds up to exactly zero evidence that he worked for the FBI. It was a rumor that took off on social media because you and others needed it to be true.

---

LOL..."presumably....." Could that be an appeal to ignorance seasoned with a sprinkle of "ought is." You haven't heard it happened, therefore it didn't happen (to infer it certainly should not have happened.)

Just so you know, putting "cover memos" in files of intelligence sources to obscure the operation is SOP. I have personally written them, to make anyone who might see that file think the operation ended unsuccessfully, when in fact the operation succeeded wildly and went on to generate highly valuable intelligence under a completely new codename (and other stuff to obscure trails....)

Yes, all of that is still subject to congressional oversight.
Zero chance that oversight happens in open hearings.
Zero.

More likely, this guy was put on ice. No clandestine source or agent provocateur who caught so much spotlight has much of a future, particularly in the internet age.

He manifestly had as much insurrectionist intent (or intent to interfere with govt process, or destruction of govt property, or trespassing, etc.....) as anyone prosecuted thus far. Those O/Ks on a golf cart who missed the whole thing didn't do as much. I mean, not even a disorderly conduct charge for trying to ignite an insurrection that you insist did, in fact, happen? Such sober-handedness is very uncharacteristic of you on this subject.

So, again, why don't we know his name?

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The committee investigated your "infiltrator" and determined that he didn't work for the FBI

---

What is his name and what has he been charged with and when was he arrested?

---

And here come the conspiracy theories...

---

he clearly on video did bad things.. why no charges? This isnt a conspiracy theory, it is fact. He is on video on jan 5th and jan 6th promoting storming the capital yet no charges..

Come on Sam, this is a slam dunk win for the Jan 6 prosecution based on the evidence

---

There were a lot of people there. The government isn't obligated to prosecute all of them just to prove they're not FBI agents. This guy apparently never entered the building and was trying to de-escalate confrontation with the police. They'd have to prosecute him solely based on his speech, which is always tricky.

---

The FBI visited (separately, simultaneously) the offices to a husband/wife pair here in Waco who attended the Trump Rally on the mall, started walking toward Congress, but age & neuropathy soon got the better of them. So they took a selfie with the Capitol building off in the distance and headed for the Metro, thence motel & car and left the DC area that day.

FBI showed them a copy of that selfie the took and asked them what they were doing in the Capitol that day.

They are investigating every single person who left a digital signal in WDC that day.

---

Yes, and presumably they investigated your guy at some point while he was on a list of unidentified suspects and before they decided he wasn't worth pursuing. Just like they did with who knows how many others. All of that adds up to exactly zero evidence that he worked for the FBI. It was a rumor that took off on social media because you and others needed it to be true.

---

LOL..."presumably....." Could that be an appeal to ignorance seasoned with a sprinkle of "ought is." You haven't heard it happened, therefore it didn't happen (to infer it certainly should not have happened.)

Just so you know, putting "cover memos" in files of intelligence sources to obscure the operation is SOP. I have personally written them, to make anyone who might see that file think the operation ended unsuccessfully, when in fact the operation succeeded wildly and went on to generate highly valuable intelligence under a completely new codename (and other stuff to obscure trails....)

Yes, all of that is still subject to congressional oversight.
Zero chance that oversight happens in open hearings.
Zero.

More likely, this guy was put on ice. No clandestine source or agent provocateur who caught so much spotlight has much of a future, particularly in the internet age.

He manifestly had as much insurrectionist intent (or intent to interfere with govt process, or destruction of govt property, or trespassing, etc.....) as anyone prosecuted thus far. Those O/Ks on a golf cart who missed the whole thing didn't do as much. I mean, not even a disorderly conduct charge for trying to ignite an insurrection that you insist did, in fact, happen? Such sober-handedness is very uncharacteristic of you on this subject.

So, again, why don't we know his name?

---

His name is Ray Epps. It's been known since January. He was interviewed privately by both the FBI and the Jan. 6 committee. Without any evidence to the contrary, one would presume that his case was handled like hundreds of others. Instead you ask us to believe for no particular reason that he was an agent provocateur. That's an appeal to ignorance.

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The committee investigated your "infiltrator" and determined that he didn't work for the FBI

---

What is his name and what has he been charged with and when was he arrested?

---

And here come the conspiracy theories...

---

he clearly on video did bad things.. why no charges? This isnt a conspiracy theory, it is fact. He is on video on jan 5th and jan 6th promoting storming the capital yet no charges..

Come on Sam, this is a slam dunk win for the Jan 6 prosecution based on the evidence

---

There were a lot of people there. The government isn't obligated to prosecute all of them just to prove they're not FBI agents. This guy apparently never entered the building and was trying to de-escalate confrontation with the police. They'd have to prosecute him solely based on his speech, which is always tricky.

---

The FBI visited (separately, simultaneously) the offices to a husband/wife pair here in Waco who attended the Trump Rally on the mall, started walking toward Congress, but age & neuropathy soon got the better of them. So they took a selfie with the Capitol building off in the distance and headed for the Metro, thence motel & car and left the DC area that day.

FBI showed them a copy of that selfie the took and asked them what they were doing in the Capitol that day.

They are investigating every single person who left a digital signal in WDC that day.

---

Yes, and presumably they investigated your guy at some point while he was on a list of unidentified suspects and before they decided he wasn't worth pursuing. Just like they did with who knows how many others. All of that adds up to exactly zero evidence that he worked for the FBI. It was a rumor that took off on social media because you and others needed it to be true.

---

LOL..."presumably....." Could that be an appeal to ignorance seasoned with a sprinkle of "ought is." You haven't heard it happened, therefore it didn't happen (to infer it certainly should not have happened.)

Just so you know, putting "cover memos" in files of intelligence sources to obscure the operation is SOP. I have personally written them, to make anyone who might see that file think the operation ended unsuccessfully, when in fact the operation succeeded wildly and went on to generate highly valuable intelligence under a completely new codename (and other stuff to obscure trails....)

Yes, all of that is still subject to congressional oversight.
Zero chance that oversight happens in open hearings.
Zero.

More likely, this guy was put on ice. No clandestine source or agent provocateur who caught so much spotlight has much of a future, particularly in the internet age.

He manifestly had as much insurrectionist intent (or intent to interfere with govt process, or destruction of govt property, or trespassing, etc.....) as anyone prosecuted thus far. Those O/Ks on a golf cart who missed the whole thing didn't do as much. I mean, not even a disorderly conduct charge for trying to ignite an insurrection that you insist did, in fact, happen? Such sober-handedness is very uncharacteristic of you on this subject.

So, again, why don't we know his name?

---

His name is Ray Epps. It's been known since January. He was interviewed privately by both the FBI and the Jan. 6 committee. Without any evidence to the contrary, one would presume that his case was handled like hundreds of others. Instead you ask us to believe for no particular reason that he was an agent provocateur. That's an appeal to ignorance.

---

people who did less are in jail. Why is that?

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The committee investigated your "infiltrator" and determined that he didn't work for the FBI

---

What is his name and what has he been charged with and when was he arrested?

---

And here come the conspiracy theories...

---

he clearly on video did bad things.. why no charges? This isnt a conspiracy theory, it is fact. He is on video on jan 5th and jan 6th promoting storming the capital yet no charges..

Come on Sam, this is a slam dunk win for the Jan 6 prosecution based on the evidence

---

There were a lot of people there. The government isn't obligated to prosecute all of them just to prove they're not FBI agents. This guy apparently never entered the building and was trying to de-escalate confrontation with the police. They'd have to prosecute him solely based on his speech, which is always tricky.

---

The FBI visited (separately, simultaneously) the offices to a husband/wife pair here in Waco who attended the Trump Rally on the mall, started walking toward Congress, but age & neuropathy soon got the better of them. So they took a selfie with the Capitol building off in the distance and headed for the Metro, thence motel & car and left the DC area that day.

FBI showed them a copy of that selfie the took and asked them what they were doing in the Capitol that day.

They are investigating every single person who left a digital signal in WDC that day.

---

Yes, and presumably they investigated your guy at some point while he was on a list of unidentified suspects and before they decided he wasn't worth pursuing. Just like they did with who knows how many others. All of that adds up to exactly zero evidence that he worked for the FBI. It was a rumor that took off on social media because you and others needed it to be true.

---

LOL..."presumably....." Could that be an appeal to ignorance seasoned with a sprinkle of "ought is." You haven't heard it happened, therefore it didn't happen (to infer it certainly should not have happened.)

Just so you know, putting "cover memos" in files of intelligence sources to obscure the operation is SOP. I have personally written them, to make anyone who might see that file think the operation ended unsuccessfully, when in fact the operation succeeded wildly and went on to generate highly valuable intelligence under a completely new codename (and other stuff to obscure trails....)

Yes, all of that is still subject to congressional oversight.
Zero chance that oversight happens in open hearings.
Zero.

More likely, this guy was put on ice. No clandestine source or agent provocateur who caught so much spotlight has much of a future, particularly in the internet age.

He manifestly had as much insurrectionist intent (or intent to interfere with govt process, or destruction of govt property, or trespassing, etc.....) as anyone prosecuted thus far. Those O/Ks on a golf cart who missed the whole thing didn't do as much. I mean, not even a disorderly conduct charge for trying to ignite an insurrection that you insist did, in fact, happen? Such sober-handedness is very uncharacteristic of you on this subject.

So, again, why don't we know his name?

---

His name is Ray Epps. It's been known since January. He was interviewed privately by both the FBI and the Jan. 6 committee. Without any evidence to the contrary, one would presume that his case was handled like hundreds of others. Instead you ask us to believe for no particular reason that he was an agent provocateur. That's an appeal to ignorance.

---

people who did less are in jail. Why is that?

---

No people accused of minor offenses are being held without bail.

People have been convicted of offenses including Parading, demonstrating, or picketing in a Capitol building, Assaulting, resisting, or impeding law enforcement officers, Obstruction of an official proceeding, Civil disorder, Entering and remaining in a restricted building or grounds, Entering and remaining in a restricted building or grounds with a deadly or dangerous weapon, Conspiracy, Seditious conspiracy, Obstruction of law enforcement during civil disorder, Assaulting, resisting, or impeding certain officers or employees using a dangerous weapon, Disorderly and disruptive conduct in a restricted building or grounds; Engaging in physical violence in a restricted building or grounds; Disorderly conduct in a Capitol building; Impeding passage through the Capitol grounds or buildings, Act of physical violence in the Capitol grounds or buildings, Theft of government property, Destruction of government property, Conspiracy to disrupt an official proceeding, Posession of an unregistered firearm, Carrying a pistol without a license, Climbing on US Capitol Grounds, Threats in interstate communications, Obstruction of Congress, Felony obstruction of Congress, and Illegally demonstrating inside the US Capitol.

Epps does not appear to have committed any of these crimes.

whiterock said:

---

So, again, why don't we know his name?

---

Why did you want to know his name?

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The committee investigated your "infiltrator" and determined that he didn't work for the FBI

---

What is his name and what has he been charged with and when was he arrested?

---

And here come the conspiracy theories...

---

he clearly on video did bad things.. why no charges? This isnt a conspiracy theory, it is fact. He is on video on jan 5th and jan 6th promoting storming the capital yet no charges..

Come on Sam, this is a slam dunk win for the Jan 6 prosecution based on the evidence

---

There were a lot of people there. The government isn't obligated to prosecute all of them just to prove they're not FBI agents. This guy apparently never entered the building and was trying to de-escalate confrontation with the police. They'd have to prosecute him solely based on his speech, which is always tricky.

---

The FBI visited (separately, simultaneously) the offices to a husband/wife pair here in Waco who attended the Trump Rally on the mall, started walking toward Congress, but age & neuropathy soon got the better of them. So they took a selfie with the Capitol building off in the distance and headed for the Metro, thence motel & car and left the DC area that day.

FBI showed them a copy of that selfie the took and asked them what they were doing in the Capitol that day.

They are investigating every single person who left a digital signal in WDC that day.

---

Yes, and presumably they investigated your guy at some point while he was on a list of unidentified suspects and before they decided he wasn't worth pursuing. Just like they did with who knows how many others. All of that adds up to exactly zero evidence that he worked for the FBI. It was a rumor that took off on social media because you and others needed it to be true.

---

LOL..."presumably....." Could that be an appeal to ignorance seasoned with a sprinkle of "ought is." You haven't heard it happened, therefore it didn't happen (to infer it certainly should not have happened.)

Just so you know, putting "cover memos" in files of intelligence sources to obscure the operation is SOP. I have personally written them, to make anyone who might see that file think the operation ended unsuccessfully, when in fact the operation succeeded wildly and went on to generate highly valuable intelligence under a completely new codename (and other stuff to obscure trails....)

Yes, all of that is still subject to congressional oversight.
Zero chance that oversight happens in open hearings.
Zero.

More likely, this guy was put on ice. No clandestine source or agent provocateur who caught so much spotlight has much of a future, particularly in the internet age.

He manifestly had as much insurrectionist intent (or intent to interfere with govt process, or destruction of govt property, or trespassing, etc.....) as anyone prosecuted thus far. Those O/Ks on a golf cart who missed the whole thing didn't do as much. I mean, not even a disorderly conduct charge for trying to ignite an insurrection that you insist did, in fact, happen? Such sober-handedness is very uncharacteristic of you on this subject.

So, again, why don't we know his name?

---

His name is Ray Epps. It's been known since January. He was interviewed privately by both the FBI and the Jan. 6 committee. Without any evidence to the contrary, one would presume that his case was handled like hundreds of others. Instead you ask us to believe for no particular reason that he was an agent provocateur. That's an appeal to ignorance.

---

people who did less are in jail. Why is that?

---

No people accused of minor offenses are being held without bail.

People have been convicted of offenses including Parading, demonstrating, or picketing in a Capitol building, Assaulting, resisting, or impeding law enforcement officers, Obstruction of an official proceeding, Civil disorder, Entering and remaining in a restricted building or grounds, Entering and remaining in a restricted building or grounds with a deadly or dangerous weapon, Conspiracy, Seditious conspiracy, Obstruction of law enforcement during civil disorder, Assaulting, resisting, or impeding certain officers or employees using a dangerous weapon, Disorderly and disruptive conduct in a restricted building or grounds; Engaging in physical violence in a restricted building or grounds; Disorderly conduct in a Capitol building; Impeding passage through the Capitol grounds or buildings, Act of physical violence in the Capitol grounds or buildings, Theft of government property, Destruction of government property, Conspiracy to disrupt an official proceeding, Posession of an unregistered firearm, Carrying a pistol without a license, Climbing on US Capitol Grounds, Threats in interstate communications, Obstruction of Congress, Felony obstruction of Congress, and Illegally demonstrating inside the US Capitol.

Epps does not appear to have committed any of these crimes.

---

I count five for which there is video evidence.

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

So, again, why don't we know his name?

---

Why did you want to know his name?

---

Rhetorical point. Here's a guy on video tape exhorting a peaceful crowd to riot, to interfere with a government proceeding, etc....not handing out tracts but energetically trying to inspire action to storm the Capitol building. Many others have been arrested for less. But this guy nobody wants to talk about. Compare his actions to the Oath Keepers. They've been organized as a group for years. They believe the government will move to suspend the Constitution. So they are prepare to respond. They are in WDC on 6 Jan, but so far from the demonstration that they missed the event. Yes, they thought their prophesies were playing out. Yes, they wanted (apparently desperately) to get there and participate. But they missed the whole thing. And somehow, now, they are insurrectionists.

But not Mr. Epps.

Any reasonable mind could see the disconnect. Groups like the OKs are definitely a looming problem in a civil society - vigilantes organizing against a overblown if not phantom threat to liberty. I would be upset if the FBI were NOT running informants in groups like that, standing ready to respond. I would be prepared to listen with an open mind to an assessment that they had finally crossed the line and it was time to round them up. But Democrats and neverTrumpers hare conflating that as just another arm of the Trump insurrection. A bridge too far.

If I'm the new GOP maj leader, Epps is the first witness I call in my 6 Jan investigation. Only I'm pretty sure that no one will be able to find him when that time comes.... And at that point, Wray and I are going to have a heart-to-heart in my office.