Explosive FBI Report Blows Giant Hole In Capitol Riot Statement, Confirms They Were Warned The Day Before That Violence Was Coming

It has been reported that the Federal Bureau of Investigation knew one day prior that extremists were planning to infiltrate the Jan. 6 protests in Washington, D.C., that ended in rioting at the U.S. Capitol, according to The Western Journal.

A report from the FBI office in Norfolk, Virginia, contradicts claims that there had been no warnings of the violence that seemed to take Capitol police by surprise.

“As of 5 January 2021, FBI Norfolk received information indicating calls for violence in response to ‘unlawful lockdowns’ to begin on 6 January 2021 in Washington, D.C.,” the document allegedly said.

“Be ready to fight,” the thread reputedly said. “Congress needs to hear glass breaking, doors being kicked in, and blood from their BLM and Pantifa slave soldiers being spilled. Get violent. Stop calling this a march, or rally, or a protest. Go there ready for war. We get our President or we die. NOTHING else will achieve this goal.”

The document reportedly quoted one online comment that said, “if Antifa or BLM get violent, leave them dead in the street.”

Another comment cited in the alleged document said there would be a need for “people on standby to provide supplies, including water and medical, to the front lines.”

“However, based on known intelligence and/or specific historical observations, it is possible the protected activity could invite a violent reaction towards the subject individual or others in retaliation or with the goal of stopping the protected activity from occurring in the first instance,” it said/

“That was a thread on a message board that was being attributable to an individual person,” D’Antuono said at the news conference.

“When my Washington field office received that information, we briefed that within 40 minutes to our law enforcement partners, federal [and] state.”

— Advertisement —

“I did not have that information, nor was that information taken into consideration in our security planning,” Sund said.

The FBI issued a statement, “standard practice is to not comment on specific intelligence products.” The bureau added, however, that field offices “routinely share information with their local law enforcement partners to assist in protecting the communities they serve.”

“There is a clear breakdown of communications and operational chain of command,” Former Republican Rep. Denver Riggleman of Virginia said.

“It would be interesting to see what the internal intelligence memos were for Capitol Police and support elements. My guess is that the intelligence reports would have had a possible Capitol incursion.”

From The Western Journal:

The outlet claimed the document noted that before the riots, individuals were sharing the layout of the tunnels connecting various buildings in the Capitol complex. It was also reported that there were conversations about potential locations in Kentucky, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts and South Carolina where those planning violence could meet before heading to Washington.

The purported document hedged on its warning, noting that potential extremist activity was also part of “activities that are protected by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.”

Steven D’Antuono, the assistant director at the FBI’s Washington Field Office, said last week the FBI had no information that the protests planned for last Wednesday were anything more than a peaceful march.

He said in a Tuesday news conference that the document was shared “with all our law enforcement partners” through the joint terrorism task force, including the Capitol Police and D.C. Metropolitan Police.

D’Antuono claimed that at the time, there was not much to be done based on that one warning.

The Post reported that former Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund, who resigned amid criticism of police response to the rioting and security failures at the Capitol, said he never knew about the warning.

2 COMMENTS

  1. There are lots of interesting points outlined in this article but I don’t know if I go along with every one of them. There is certainly some validity but I am going to hold my opinions until I look into it more. Fine article, thanks and we want more! Added to FeedBurner too

  2. I don’t think I’ve read a post like this before. It’s well-thought out, which means that I learned something new today. I’m going to check out some of your other posts to see if they each have the same high-quality applied to them!

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here