(Ken Silva, Headline USA) Lost in the wave of seemingly never-ending Trump indictments is the fact that the federal court in Washington DC continues to hamper efforts to disclose the identities of FBI informants and other undercover law enforcement who participated in the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol Hill protest-turned-riot.
The latest judicial roadblock to J6 transparency came Monday in an opinion from Obama-appointed District Judge James Boasberg, who denied J6 defendant Ryan Zink’s motion to have the Justice Department disclose “all undercover agents, Antifa activists and confidential human sources” that were within his “sphere of alleged conduct” on Jan. 6.
Zink argued in June that such disclosure was necessary for his defense.
“Mr. Zink is being prosecuted for serious crimes in part for trying to expose unknown vandals at the Capitol whom are not being prosecuted,” his motion said.
“As a matter of basic fairness, due process, and the right to confront accusers, Mr. Zink has a right to know and cross-examine the witnesses and actors he is accused of interacting with on January 6.”
Specifically, Zink—who faces charges of obstructing an official proceeding and trespassing on Captiol grounds—sought the identities of vandals that he claims to have stopped.
“Defendant Zink was present on the east side of the Capitol on January 6 as several mysterious individuals committed property destruction, including smashing of windows. Zink counseled against such property destruction and tried to prevent it,” his motion said.
“But mysterious unidentified vandals threatened Zink, and Zink was unable to prevent the mysterious perpetrators from damaging the building.”
In denying Zink’s motion, Judge Boasberg acknowledged that it would be important if Zink interacted with undercover informants in the J6 crowd. However, Zink didn’t provide any compelling evidence of this, the judge said.
“Zink’s motion simply requests the identification of any and all undercover Government agents who may have been present at the Capitol on January 6, regardless of whether these purported actors could have affected or did affect Zink’s conduct or state of mind,” the judge said.
“This request is far too broad.”
The judge did say he’d reconsider Zink’s motion if he narrows its scope. His decision comes in spite of recent information about the presence of undercover feds in the J6 crowd—including from former Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund.
Sund recently told conservative broadcaster Tucker Carlson there were “18 or 19 domestic terrorists coming to this event, so of course they’re going to have resources and they’re not going to just put in one agent. You’re going to have multiple [undercover agents].”
Additionally, the House Weaponization Subcommittee disclosed an FBI whistleblower’s claim in May that the bureau’s DC office tried to sequester information about potential J6 from other FBI offices.
The whistleblower, retired FBI agent George Hill, said the bureau’s Boston field office requested the J6 footage from DC. However, the DC field office denied this request, according to Hill.
“The [Washington field office] said, ‘We can’t show you those videos unless you can tell us the exact time and place those individuals were in the Capitol’, to which [Boston agent] responded back: ‘Why can’t you just give us access to the 11,000 hours of video?’”
According to Hill, the DC office then responded, “Because there may be undercover officers or confidential human sources on those videos, whose identity we’d need to protect.”
Additionally, during the Proud Boys sedition trial earlier this year, the Justice Department disclosed that at least 10 to 12 undercover DC Metropolitan Police Department officers also participated in Jan. 6.
A defense attorney from the same trial also alleged that there were 19 DHS informants in the J6 crowd. According to that attorney, “there are reasons to suspect the true number [of informants] is higher.”
Zink’s trial is set to begin Sept. 5.
Ken Silva is a staff writer at Headline USA. Follow him at twitter.com/jd_cashless.
