The Curious Case of Ray Epps

On January 5, 2021, Ray Epps was filmed while calling for Trump supporters to enter the Capitol on the following day.  Onlookers accused him of being a "Fed!"  Considering the events of the following day, he looks like someone to be picked up for incitement.  But wait, there's more.

The following day, he is again on film.  This time, prior to Trump's speech, he is announcing that everyone must march on the Capitol after the speech and points the direction to the Capitol.  Hmm, really boosting for this march.  But wait, there's more.

After the speech and at the outermost barrier to the Capitol, Ray is on film as a mob hovers.  He is spotted whispering in the ear of a man.  Seconds later, that very man makes the first breech of the Capitol perimeter.  He is later seen among the crowd that clashed fiercely with the police at the Capitol steps.

Considering all this, it is no surprise that he was pictured on the FBI most-wanted, an obvious organizer and/or cheerleader for the attack.  Despite being identified relatively quickly, he was not arrested.  The day after Revolver.news did a report on Epps, his picture was removed from the FBI most-wanted.  What is going on?

Some suggest that he was indeed a federal plant.  That sounds like conspiracy stuff.  However, when you consider how many FBI agents were involved in the would-be kidnapping of Governor Whitmer of Michigan, it seems less far-fetched.  Another possibility is that the Ray Epps clips are out of context.  A fuller viewing might reveal something entirely different, or even opposite, of what these clips show.  Such misleading edits led to the 'Fine People Hoax' and the 'drink bleach hoax' for Trump.  What's to say that some Trump supporter didn't do the same to Ray Epps?

That Epps was removed from the wanted list and Attorney General Garland refused to offer any explanation to Congress is curious.  He could say that they looked into Mr. Epps and cleared him of wrongdoing.  Nope.  Were there federal agents inciting the crowd on January 6?  Not going to comment on that.  Oh.  The fact that a straight denial was not offered is troublesome.

Scott Adams has recently stated that "Innocent until proven guilty" only applies to individuals.  The government should be held to the opposite standard: guilty until proven innocent.  The government needs to demonstrate its innocence via transparency.  Failure to be transparent should be held as evidence of corruption.  I like that standard.