Today, a clip was floating around Twitter of Kentucky Representative Thomas Massie in dispute with the Bolshevik Raskin. This comes from the House Judiciary Committee hearing on September 21st, 2022, the relevant hour of which can be seen here:
"Massie Confronts Dems About Ray Epps: 'Why Is There No Interest In Him?'
(Forbes Breaking News; September 23rd, 2022)
The complete 8-hour hearing (which covered several different House Resolutions) can be seen here (House dot gov; Judiciary Committee), which leads to the Judiciary Committee’s official YouTube video of the same:
Massie can be seen presenting evidence at 5:45:00, with his floor time proceeding again after recess at 7:15:00.
The 1-minute clip of Raskin was initially floated last week by low-IQ low-information left-wing propaganda account @Acyn, with the intended propaganda for his followers meant to be, "[Raskin is Bolshevik like us, so we should believe his narrative.]"
"Raskin: You guys are trying to make this poor schmuck who showed up to your protest into something a lot bigger than he is. He’s just trying to survive and he’s on your side. You don’t have many voters left, you might want to try to hang on to them"
This “your guy” propaganda — a DNC talking point — was subsequently repeated down the propaganda chain by usual suspects such as David Pakman:
and Brian Tyler Cohen:
As a quick side note, I have pointed out less formally before that the DNC's social marketing propaganda generally works like this:
1) DNC propaganda apparatuses such as Media Matters, Arabella Advisors, and DNC propaganda arms such as CNN scour archives for usable talking points to remove subject from context and make the edit meme-able.
2) DNC propaganda is then issued to its (often) paid repeaters — puppets such as Acyn, Occupy Democrats, JoJoFromJerz, and BrooklynDad_Defiant of the Pyschosis.
3) These puppets then sell the appearance of "relatability" to the DNC's useful idiots; they repeat the DNC talking points nearly verbatim while pretending to be unaffiliated — despite them often taking money directly from DNC-funded social marketing groups.
4) The DNC's useful idiots believe that they're seeing normal people simply having opinions. The useful idiots thus adopt the DNC's talking points, believing that they came up with them as part of "grassroots" opinions.
Even more concisely:
• DNC Propaganda Think Tanks
⬇
• CNN/MSNBC, paid social marketers / sock puppets / puppets
⬇
• Useful idiots
This is how common users (useful idiots) end up repeating DNC talking points while being able to claim that they do not watch CNN or MSNBC; they get their information from the same DNC propaganda network while believing that they are independent researchers. This is how the total state ensures that its useful idiots all hold the same viewpoint.
I have spoken also about Raskin's Bolshevik status. Raskin will say whatever he needs to say to create the appearance of "truth" for this same propaganda effect, such as in September 2021 when he deflected against the DNC's use of Antifa/BLM brown-shirts in the 2020 Antifa/BLM Insurrection by saying that the FBI does not list these as problem groups.
The slight of hand was that there is a difference between the FBI not targeting these groups (true) and these groups being DNC-funded insurrectionists (avoided truth). Raskin knew that he could use a procedural barrier to float this propaganda, since he knows that the DNC controls the FBI's investigative directions.
Back to Ray Epps, then: Raskin used the same procedural manipulation and projected it onto Massie. Raskin claimed that Epps' testimony has not been revealed because no testimony has been revealed. This is true. But what is the slight of hand?
• Raskin claims that the Epps–Fed issue is "conspiracy theory" that has been "debunked", which cannot be done without revealing Epps' testimony. Thus, "debunked" is itself DNC propaganda, and it has been repeated by the New York Times and the usual DNC repeater chain.
• Raskin avoids addressing Epps' calls to action, his effect on the crowds in which he was embedded, or Epps' lack of outstanding charges. Raskin avoids addressing this Epps information that is in fact part of the public record, pretending instead that he knows nothing of Epps despite his comments simultaneously admitting details about Epps which show that he is indeed aware of Epps in particular.
And what is public record?
This can be pulled from Congressional record as well as a New York Times article that repeated that record, albeit with the same DNC talking points attached:
• NYT, Jan 2022:
The Ray Epps timeline:
• January 5th, 2021, Ray Epps is seen in footage by Live-Streamer Tim "Baked Alaska" Gionet talking to MAGA-adorned protestors, telling them that they must not only go "to" the Capitol but "inside" the Capitol on January 6th. The crowd accuses him of being a fed.
• January 6th, 2021, Ray Epps is seen between the White House and the Capitol, directing people at Trump's speech to the Capitol, 20 minutes before the speech ended, saying that "that's where our problems are".
• Epps is seen in another video telling someone, "When we go in, leave this here [pointing to something]. You don’t need to get shot" (i.e., still insisting on going "in").
• Later, Epps is seen talking into the ear of protestor Ryan Samsel just before Samsel pushes a police barricade into police at the edges of the Capitol Building's outer-lawn perimeter.
• January 7th, 2021, Epps appears as #16 on the FBI's "Most Wanted List" for the January 6th event.
• January 8th, 2021, Epps claims to have seen his name on the list after being informed by his wife (and she via family, though testimony gets patchy here) and calls an FBI tip-line to explain his involvement. The call lasts 27 minutes, though this may include on-hold time. He claims to have told Samsel that the police were just doing their job. This was corroborated by Samsel in January 2022 who said the exact words were, "Dude, relax, the cops are doing their job."
• January 11th, 2021, Arizona Republic contacted Epps, showed him video recorded of him on January 5th, and asked him what he meant by "go inside", and Epps responded, "The only thing that meant is we would go in the doors like everyone else. It was totally, totally wrong the way they went in". This does not exactly change his original meaning or put "Fed" accusations at ease. If anything, this would still be consistent with an FBI agent encouraging illegal activity while keeping his own hands clean. But, Epps also claims to be guarding statements because he has sought an attorney.
• March 3, 2021, Epoch Times reports that Epps meets in-person with the FBI at Epp's Phoenix attorney's office, claiming that he brought first aid since he was expecting a terror attack. This seems like retroactive statements that follow from public knowledge of the pipe bombs near the Capitol. Epps would likely be unable to prove this motive with information pre-dating January 6th.
• July 1st, 2021, Epps is removed from the FBI list without FBI statement.
• November 2021, Epps spoke to House Committee investigators, who report that Epps said that he is not an FBI asset or member. The House committee reported this interview in January 2022. (Note: while mistaken persons would simply say that this is the end of it, it should be noted that FBI assets and agents with undercover statuses are allowed to maintain their cover under questioning unless they are unmasked by the FBI, and these statements may not have been made under oath, so this testimony is nearly meaningless.)
• July 2022, Epps talks with the New York Times, saying, "I am at the center of this thing, and it’s the biggest farce that’s ever been ... It’s just not right. The American people are being led down a path. I think it should be criminal." (This apparently in regards to the right-wing narrative being spread about him, against which he intends to pursue legal action.)
Of "James Ray Epps" himself, the non-FBI theory of Epps gathered from public record is that he is a 61-year-old (as of 2022) former Marine from Queen Creek, Arizona, the former owner of "the Knotty Barn" there, a wedding and events-planning venue which now lists itself as under new management, and, in 2011, was a Chapter organizer for Arizona Oath Keepers (presumably, he is not currently a member and was not a member at the time of January 6th). He now lives anonymously, and, under this good faith information, has (likely) retired to avoid the public eye.
That is pretty much the extent of the fact list, though there has been additional sensationalism attached.
One issue is that Ted Cruz questioned Jill Sanborn, Executive Assistant Director for National Security Branch in the FBI, who declined to clarify Epps' status. See Forbes video of that exchange in January 2022:
However, people should note that Cruz did this performative questioning only days after he had received bad press for calling January 6th protestors "insurrectionists" and had had a bad interview on Tucker Carlson as a result. Cruz was very likely trying to redirect his bad coverage into good coverage among the right, transferring right-wing anger at himself into anger at the FBI. Additionally, he knew that Jill Sanborn was unable or unwilling to answer any questions, and Cruz was simply using that fact to make it appear that the FBI had Epps acting as an undercover agent agitating the crowd.
Similar events have played out with Massie (above), Goetz (September 22, 2022),
and Cotton (January 2022),
where they have asked for details and met the FBI's brick wall (though their questioning was far less performative than Cruz'). Massie even spoke with AG Garland in October 2021, and Garland provided zero information (from Massie’s official YouTube):
On the one hand, it is partially true that the FBI cannot comment on ongoing investigations, but, on the other hand, they do indeed have a Constitutional obligation for a baseline level of transparency at these meetings — but have not offered any. Massie suggests this at 5:49:00 in the September 21st House Committee video. Garland and the FBI is allowed to disclose depersonalized information, but they have opted not to disclose any information at all — not even information that could put "conspiracy theories" such as Epps to rest.
So, what is the recent misdirection here in this latest Raskin–Acyn–DNC propaganda?
The DNC propagandists are focusing on "debunked" and "conspiracy theory" for something that has not been debunked and is indeed plausible.
More importantly, this exchange between Raskin and Massie was during a meeting wherein Massie and others were attempting to pass House Resolution 1356 (H.Res.1356) which would force the FBI to reveal details on Epps — and Raskin was fervently opposing a motion which would expand the scope and reveal FBI assets on the ground on January 6th. That is, Raskin does not want Epps' testimony released, does not want the FBI's fact-finding to be part of the congressional record, and wants to stop the FBI from admitting that it had assets on the ground. This is essentially a repeat of the DNC's avoidance of transparency.
My long speculation on Epps is that he is just some oafish old man experiencing cognitive decline who bit off more than he could chew, but the political game has developed into something more radioactive. Cruz, in particular, took a big risk by making Epps a concern, and Massie and Gosar may fall victim to DNC propaganda both if the records remain sealed (this allows the DNC to continue saying, “debunked” and “conspiracy theory”) and if Epps is disavowed by the FBI (this allows the DNC to be vindicated). Massie and other GOP figures have proudly stated that they are concerned with the truth — even if it clears Epps, but the DNC will leave those proclamations on the editing room floor.
Consequently, this current wave of DNC propaganda makes the GOP figures asking about Epps appear to be unsympathetic to Epps “the common man”, which is a pathos argument that works on the low-information interaction-webs attached to figures such as Acyn. The DNC does not seem to realize that the FBI’s failure to simply say, “Epps was definitively not an agent or asset,” is itself the cruelty that Raskin accuses the GOP of bringing upon Epps. Should the DNC narrative hold true, the FBI clearing the air would thus likely help Epps, since Epps could reclaim his good name. But, the DNC not wanting to clear the air is consistent with their tendency to both support the unquestionable managerial state (i.e., “[Do not question us — just accept our narrative]”) and encourage right-wing protests by being supremely unreasonable. That right-wing discontent allows the DNC to further paint the opposition in a poor light, so they resist giving up this leverage — even if it means that they pretend that Epps has signed their Black Book, making him a target of the same “conspiracy theories” that they pretend to oppose. For them, it’s a potent wedge issue.
The good faith maneuver by the DNC would be simple: if Epps is indeed just a man, DNC persons such as Raskin could have agreed to a privacy clause for H.Res.1356 which allows the "conspiracy theorists" within the GOP to see the FBI documents in a SCIF, thus protecting Epps from public scrutiny (if innocent) while defusing the GOP obsession with Epps. The GOP and DNC could agree to Epps' innocence (if innocent) and ask the public to respect Epps' privacy. Because Massie is not a RINO GOP figure, this would carry far more weight than say, Liz Cheney saying anything about anything.
No such DNC argument was made.
Instead, Raskin used his usual propagandist deflections: that the issue should be dropped and no one should look further because the very question is harmful to the DNC (similar to the DNC's 2020 election propaganda).
This makes the Epps issue follow the DNC's hoax pattern, which in this case is to float a claim ("debunked") using knowledge that they can hide from the public. If, indeed, there is nothing behind the Epps curtain, then the DNC could embarrass these GOP "conspiracy theorists" by allowing and even encouraging the discovery of these FBI documents. The DNC could own the news cycle for several days with this embarassment. But, it is far more useful to them to make a claim without providing the evidence, obscuring the truth behind their propaganda efforts.
Epps aside, the 8-hour Committee video is also funny because Rep. Mondaire Jones (Bolshevik, NY), takes the floor at 5:52:00 and claims that Sicknick was "bludgeoned to death" (5:59:20),
and the GOP figures in the room (e.g., Rep Bishop of NC) had to explain to those supporting this notion that Sicknick's cause of death was due to natural causes the day after January 6th. The GOP members also have to explain the difference between the police statements on Sicknick's death (which were likely made so that Sicknick would be awarded a higher death gratuity for an “on-duty” death) versus the medical examiner's statement (the official ruling).
Jones, flailing for a fallback position, argues that Sicknick would not have died if he were not present on January 6th (time travel absurdity), and the GOP members have to explain basic causality to Jones. Jones even returns and makes the comment at 7:54:00 that Sicknick had a “heart attack” — still having no clue what he is talking about, since Sicknick died of a stroke.
This could be hilariously symbolic of where the DNC is right now. They cannot understand causality and are left googling New York Times stories in these committee meetings, being even lower information than an Acyn follower.