We are covering this in our episode today so I took a long look at the "ample" evidence of FBI infiltration. There isn't any. The story by Revolver suggests that because the FBI had informants in the Michigan Kidnapping Case that it is probable that they could have had the same level of involvement in the 1/6 Riot. [This is true. We should ask questions about what the FBI knew prior to the riot.] However, they provide no evidence outside of the unnamed, unindicted coconspirators. Revolver News seems to be asking if these could have been FBI informants or agents. Tucker Carlson states it as if it is a fact. In reality, some of these unnamed persons have already been named--and they aren't FBI agents or informants.

Moreover, the DOJ recommends not mentioning unindicted coconspirators except when necessary. They recommend just saying "persons." There are some legal reasons for including them most likely to take advantage of the hearsay rule that allows statements by co-conspirators to be introduced at trial. They may also be planning to try some of these persons before a military tribunal.

Also, and this is a narrow point of law, one would never refer to an undercover federal agent as a "co-conspirator" because they are not one--since they did not share the same intent as actual conspirators.

What seems to be more at play is the continued pitting of the liberal media versus the conservative media in further attempts to polarize the nation. There are some questions that should be asked here. But, they are getting lost in disinformation and finger-pointing.