The Recent Radicalization of the Woman Who Allegedly Stole the Pelosi Laptop

A number of outlets (Politico may have been the first) are reporting on the story of Riley June Williams, who was charged (but not arrested) yesterday in crimes related to the January 6 insurrection. The paragraph of her arrest affidavit that has gotten the most attention describes how a witness (Witness 1) told the FBI that he or she had seen a video depicting Williams stealing a laptop or hard drive from Pelosi’s office with the intent of selling it, via a third person, to Russian intelligence.

W1 also claimed to have spoken to friends of WILLIAMS, who showed W1 a video of WILLIAMS taking a laptop computer or hard drive from Speaker Pelosi’s office. W1 stated that WILLIAMS intended to send the computer device to a friend in Russia, who then planned to sell the device to SVR, Russia’s foreign intelligence service. According to W1, the transfer of the computer device to Russia fell through for unknown reasons and WILLIAMS still has the computer device or destroyed it. This matter remains under investigation.

I wanted to look at the background to that story.

First, the investigation into Williams may have started when Witness 1 called into FBI tip lines “in the days following” the insurrection.

In the days following the January 6, 2021, events, a witness (“W1”) made several phone calls into the FBI’s telephone tip line related to the U.S. Capitol attacks.

Witness 1 presented as Williams’ former romantic partner, of unspecified sex.

In them, the caller stated that he/she was the former romantic partner of RILEY JUNE WILLIAMS (“WILLIAMS”), that he/she saw WILLIAMS depicted in video footage taken on January 6, 2021, from inside the U.S. Capitol Building

The affidavit doesn’t say, but it is possible that Witness 1 first saw Williams in videos posted of that day, and then started calling Williams’ friends, which led to the discovery of the Pelosi laptop story. There’s no mention in the affidavit of a more extensive interview with Witness 1– just multiple tips pointing to online videos and the claim that “friends” of Williams showed Witness 1 a video. The laptop video does not appear in the affidavit (nor is there any indication it has been posted publicly). Its existence, then, is all filtered through the credibility — or not — of Witness 1.

The affidavit also reveals that Williams’ mom made a suspicious persons report about Witness 1 on or before January 11, so probably after Witness 1 first called into tips about Williams. When Harrisburg-based FBI agents responded to that suspicious person report, Williams’ mom was still able to reach Williams by phone.

I have spoken with local law enforcement agents in Harrisburg about their recent interactions with WILLIAMS’ parents. According to those officers, on January 11, 2021, local law enforcement received a suspicious persons report filed by WILLIAMS’ mother. Officers arrived at the address that WILLIAMS shares with her mother and interviewed her mother. WILLIAMS was not present. According to WILLIAMS’ mother, the suspicious person was assumed to be W1. WILLIAMS’ mother, with officers present, used her cell phone to place a video-enabled phone call to WILLIAMS. Officers observed WILLIAMS on her mother’s cell phone screen and noted that WILLIAMS was wearing a brown-colored jacket, consistent with the screenshots above.

Williams’ mom told reporters — but not, apparently, the FBI — that her daughter had just recently gotten involved in “far right message boards.”

The reporter then interviewed a woman who identified herself as WILLIAMS’ mother and showed her some type of video footage. WILLIAMS’ mother then stated that she recognized her daughter inside the U.S. Capitol Building and that her daughter had taken a sudden interest in President Trump’s politics and “far right message boards.” She claimed that WILLIAMS “took off,” “is gone,” and is waiting for law enforcement to come to WILLIAMS and ask her about her activities in the Capitol .

Even though this affidavit suggests Williams’ mom called the FBI about former partner Witness 1, it seems that on some date not described in the affidavit, Williams skipped town and took precautionary measures.

It appears that WILLIAMS has fled. According to local law enforcement officers in Harrisburg, WILLIAMS’ mother stated that that WILLIAMS packed a bag and left her home and told her mother she would be gone for a couple of weeks. WILLIAMS did not provide her mother any information about her intended destination. Sometime after January 6, 2021, WILLIAMS changed her telephone number and deleted what I believe were her social media accounts on Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, Reddit, Telegram, and Parler.

Williams’ dad, who doesn’t live with her mom (though he does live in the Harrisburg area), drove to and from the rally with her, but was not with her during the day.

According to the Harrisburg officers, on or about January 16, 2021, officers called WILLIAMS’ father who resides in Camp Hill, PA. He stated that he drove to Washington, D.C., with WILLIAMS for the protests on January 6, 2021. He stated that his daughter and he did not stay together throughout the day and that WILLIAMS was meeting up with other individuals she knew at the protests. WILLIAMS later met up with her father outside of the U.S. Capitol Building, and they returned home to Harrisburg together.

I raise all this to suggest that there are at least two narrators here — the mom, who called the FBI about the former partner and not the far right friends, knew where her daughter was but now says she’s gone, and the former partner, who claims to have known what friends Williams was with but who also might have been recently dumped — who should not be trusted unquestioningly. And the dad appears to have his own ties to this world.

All that’s particularly important background for what is likely the more important detail in the affidavit: Williams was directing traffic inside the Capitol, and directing mobs up a staircase to Pelosi’s office.

She has brown shoulder length hair and wears eyeglasses. She is wearing a black face mask below her chin, around her neck. She can be heard in the video repeatedly yelling, “Upstairs, upstairs, upstairs,” and can be seen physically directing other intruders to proceed up a staircase.


I have also reviewed maps of the interior areas of the U.S. Capitol and confirmed the subject appears to have been in an area near “the crypt,” sometimes referred to as the “Small House Rotunda.” In the audio of the ITV News video, the reporter states that the recording took place near the U.S. Capitol Building area called “the crypt.” In the background of the top screenshot above, a bust of Winston Churchill is visible behind the subject, which is also consistent with the location in the “Small House Rotunda.” The maps confirm that there is a nearby staircase, which leads to the office of the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi.

Here’s a video of a clip included in the affidavit. It shows her rushing out while others are still coming in, and gives a better view of her zebra striped back described in the affidavit.

The stolen laptop may or may not exist (though, as Peterr notes below, Pelosi told Lesly Stahl one was stolen). It may or may not be headed to Russian intelligence (though it did make me think of reports on a Russian tie to far right activists in Lancaster, PA leading up to the election).

But a far better documented part of this story is that this woman, whose mother claims is new to this scene, was already in a position to be briefed on and directing traffic the day of the attack.

Updated with the clip to replace the video.

Update: This video appears to show a Pelosi laptop being taken. And this tweet shows “Riley” claiming to have Pelosi’s hard drives.

77 replies
  1. Peterr says:

    In Pelosi’s interview with Leslie Stahl, she says quite directly that a computer laptop was taken from her office:

    Across the hall, a group broke into the speakers private office.

    Lesley Stahl: Oh wow. Oh wow.

    Nancy Pelosi: You see what they did to the mirror there? The glass was all over the place. They took a–

    Lesley Stahl: They smashed–

    Nancy Pelosi: –computer and all that stuff. But– laptop. And then the desk that they actually were at was right there that they defamed in that way, feet on the desk and all that.

      • subtropolis says:

        One of her aides likewise has stated that a laptop was taken. However, he said that it was used only for presentations and had nothing of interest on it.

        Not that this woman won’t be in for a mountain of trouble if a prosecutor can somehow make this so-far ephemeral story stick somehow.

        Two things, though: Her shouts of apparent direction may simply have been due to exuberance as she and others made their way up those steps. And, the theft of the laptop— if she, in fact, took it — may have been just a crime of opportunity. There was a lot of that going on.

        If she is found to have been taking instruction, though …

    • earlofhuntingdon says:

      Nice framing about an important subset of stories: the likelihood that organized efforts used the general melee to commit espionage or other focused crimes.

      Obviously, more evidence would be helpful. If a laptop was stolen, for example, it does not mean this was the laptop or that Williams stole it, or, if she did, that she or her patrons intended to sell it to the Russians instead of someone else. If it was on the market, a lot of players – from billionaire right wingers to foreign intel agencies – might bid on it.

      Admittedly, bad actors often use cutouts – here, probably a series of them – to commit actual crimes. But it is passing strange that an alleged newbie would be so well briefed on the layout of a secure part of the building and be given responsibility to get and get out with an important object and pass it up the chain. This investigation is likely to take quite some time; its implications will be considerable.

    • @pwrchip says:

      klynn says:
      January 18, 2021 at 10:21 am

      Hmmm. Is she a plumber? (Snark)

      For me, it shows this operation was well coordinated, in that some rioters had specific instructions of what to do. We now know that there was coordination with an intel tour of the layout of the capitol to instruct where specific offices were. There’s video showing Capitol police opening gates, doors and waving rioters into the Capitol, etc. Now this laptop girl the Q people should ask, in the middle of a riot aka coup who would choose to leave just as things started getting exciting for them, after all the trouble of getting there in the 1st place from PA(?not sure of her state).

      • klynn says:

        I do not disagree. The Watergate Break-in had a plan as well. This seems to be a historical pattern. Thus my snark. I in no way was intending to make light of a serious issue. Trying to align this with some historical concerns regarding targeted break-ins and theft.

      • DrPhyl says:

        Harrisburg PA is less than 2 hours from DC, it’s quite close. So that isn’t even a slight problem. I am interested in whether the laptop was a crime of opportunity, thinking that the Russians would of course pay big bucks for anything stolen from Pelosi. Thanks for the reporting, I’ll keep looking for more info.

  2. Badger Robert says:

    She is going to have a hard time leaving the country because of the Covid restrictions. I hope someone gives her up.

    • Renaissance Slacker says:

      She is going to have a hard time leaving the country, period. She is likely on the no-fly list, and if she has a passport, I’m sure it’s been flagged.

  3. Mendy says:

    Interesting that she hasn’t been arrested despite the laptop claims. I would think that would be a high priority.
    I saw a post online asking why this hasn’t been declared a National Security Event because the VP was there. Is that a thing and should it have happened?

    • Peterr says:

      It is a thing and should have happened. The reason it didn’t, according to an NBC story by Julia Ainsley posted this morning, is that for the last four years, DHS has been increasingly under the thumb of Stephen Miller, and focused on illegal immigration to the exclusion of damn near everything else, including white supremacists.

      Former Department of Homeland Security officials spanning the Bush, Obama and Trump administrations say the Jan. 6 siege of the U.S. Capitol exposed the shortcomings of an agency with an inexperienced staff and a misplaced focus on immigration instead of the rise of domestic threats over the past four years.

      “They tend to be younger, with not as much experience. They don’t have the incidents under their belts to know the proper protocols. So many protocols were not followed” on Jan. 6, said Elizabeth Neumann, who was deputy chief of staff at the Department of Homeland Security, or DHS, until April.

      Instead, as armed rioters overtook police and moved into the Capitol, armed agents from DHS, an agency expressly designed to prevent another terrorist incident like the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, stood inside a nearby building waiting for a command to deploy that never came. There is also no indication that DHS shared any intelligence with its state and local partners or with U.S. Capitol Police before Jan. 6 that would have indicated that the protests could turn into a riot.

      Armed DHS agents were on standby near Capitol riot but weren’t deployed till too late
      DHS also failed to designate the day of President Donald Trump’s rally in Washington as a National Special Security Event, as it has now done with the week leading up to President-elect Joe Biden’s inauguration Wednesday. If it had done so, on Jan. 6 the Secret Service would have been able to coordinate with the National Guard and DHS’ law enforcement agencies, including the Transportation Security Administration, Customs and Border Protection and Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

      But it was the four years of inadequately monitoring and communicating the rising threat of right-wing domestic extremists that ultimately led to DHS’ failure to prevent the events at the Capitol, the former DHS officials said.


      As more experienced and Senate-confirmed homeland security secretaries like John Kelly and Kirstjen Nielsen left the Trump administration and were replaced by acting secretaries, so, too, were experienced lawyers and law enforcement officials replaced by Trump loyalists with minimal experience. Most have had one important qualification: loyalty to White House adviser Stephen Miller, an anti-immigration hawk, Neumann said.

      “For Miller to get his policies through, he put people in positions who had no qualifications whatsoever. While Stephen was solely focused on immigration, the department does other things. And the more critical parts of the department were impeded,” said Neumann, who endorsed Biden for president after having left DHS last year.

      Lots more at the link.

      • Mendy says:

        Scary. The logical conclusion is that if we were attacked right now by a foreign country the same thing would happen. Except it would be a million times worse. This entire administration is a national security threat.

        • Renaissance Slacker says:

          I’m frankly amazed no hostile foreign power has taken advantage of an essentially decapitated US in the last few weeks. I bet our generals and intelligence leaders have quietly let their counterparts know that despite the chaos, there are still grownups in charge where it counts, carrying some very big sticks.

      • harpie says:

        Ainsley: exposed the shortcomings of an agency with an inexperienced staff and a misplaced focus on immigration instead of the rise of domestic threats over the past four years.

        The word “misplaced” has the feeling of being accidental.
        […as in someone might misplace her glasses.]
        I think the word should be DISPLACED…
        […as in ON PURPOSE.]

        • earlofhuntingdon says:

          Yes, “misplaced” offers journalistic absolution by eliminating nearly all agency.

          DHS did not misplace anything. It lost its moral compass because it didn’t want one. It lost and separated families because it didn’t want to find them – or have them find each other. Its policies were as intentional as they were corrupt.

          • Peterr says:

            In this case, however, Ainsley was very very clear about who was at work intentionally misplacing the focus: Stephen Miller.

            “For Miller to get his policies through, he put people in positions who had no qualifications whatsoever. While Stephen was solely focused on immigration, the department does other things. And the more critical parts of the department were impeded,” said Neumann, who endorsed Biden for president after having left DHS last year.

            The current acting secretary going into the inauguration is Peter Gaynor, formerly head of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, who was appointed after the abrupt departure this month of acting Secretary Chad Wolf. Wolf’s own appointment was ruled illegitimate by a federal judge because an acting secretary who came before him lacked the authority to appoint him.

            The current deputy assistant secretary responsible for engaging with the private sector about threats to the homeland graduated from college in 2015.

            The acting general counsel, Chad Mizelle, who has the authority to greenlight or block any legal position coming from the agency, graduated from law school in 2013.

            Mizelle, a close ally of Miller’s, was appointed after yet another shakeup in late 2019. His wife, Kathryn Mizelle, was recently nominated by Trump for a lifetime appointment as a federal judge, even though the American Bar Association told Senate leaders that she was “not qualified” because she had never tried a case after she was admitted to practice law.

            Stephen Miller did the misplacing, and Ainsley named him explicitly and showed the receipts.

            • harpie says:

              Yes, she does, and all credit to her for doing so.
              GinevradB puts it together at 2:04PM.

              Miller DISPLACED “the focus” of DHS.

              Trump PLACED Miller, in ORDER to do that.
              The GOP PLACED Trump.
              [who PLACED the GOP?]
              Qui bono?

              • rip says:

                Qui bono?

                Shirley just the regular people who need to work 8-14 hours/day to have enough to survive. Shirley they are behind the revolts.

                Shirley the poor and disenfranchised that couldn’t afford a greyhound ticket to anywhere. They must be behind the revolts.

                But couldn’t possibly be those that capitalize (CAPITALize) on disruption; those that make profit on mayhem; those who have way too much and want more.

                Couldn’t be external influencers who want to see the end of this 250+ year experiment. Methinks yes.

              • rlhall says:

                Tiny point, and I don’t mean to be pedantic:
                Qui bono = what good? isn’t the right expression.
                This is: Cui Bono = Good for whom?
                It’s more like, “Follow the money …”

          • Ginevra diBenci says:

            Thanks, harpie and EOH. I would go the next step and say that Stephen Miller actively sabotaged any DHS efforts to root out or even discourage white supremacist terrorism. Not only does his VDare affiliation reveal his own sympathies with such groups, but he has recognized all along their political usefulness to Trump. He’s been behind much of the “very good people on both sides” rhetoric, most of which I suspect that he scripted.

      • Raven Eye says:

        Until they get things figured out as to what actually happened with Miller and DHS, he should be persona non grata at DHS. It scares me to think that he probably has a TS/SCI clearance.

      • Chris.EL says:

        Wonder what S. Miller will be doing in the days, months ahead! He sure is a sneaky dude — has a lot of ideas, hatreds, plans. Someone to keep track of?

    • subtropolis says:

      How is it “interesting” that she hasn’t yet been apprehended? Law enforcement is on it. The media, too. All because of the laptop claims.

      Real life doesn’t operate on internet time.

  4. OldTulsaDude says:

    It appears that while she is making a beeline for the exits others are still in the process of entering which means she was a likely part of the first in group and had knowledge of how to find the speaker’s office. Makes me wonder if she received a capitol tour prior to Jan. 6th.

    • Raven Eye says:

      That was a pretty chilling story to listen to. And it looks like people are starting to listen. Oath Keepers around here have been tolerated as just part of the scenery — “patrolling” the business district of Medford (Medford?!?!) during the protests up in Portland. But there seems to be more willingness at the national level at least to describe them as “radical”, “terrorist”, etc.

      I’m hopeful that the Biden team will make sure that DOJ, the FBI, DoD, DHS, etc. will start treating them as they deserve to be treated. I sent an email to both senators asking that they encourage DoD to ban membership in those groups by military personnel under DoD’s authority for good order and discipline.

  5. bg says:

    “According to WILLIAMS’ mother, the suspicious person was assumed to be W1. WILLIAMS’ mother, with officers present, used her cell phone to place a video-enabled phone call to WILLIAMS. Officers observed WILLIAMS on her mother’s cell phone screen and noted that WILLIAMS was wearing a brown-colored jacket, consistent with the screenshots above.”

    That cell phone call, tho. #shuddabeenreadingDrEW

  6. PeterS says:

    Forgive me if this is a stupid question (IT is not my strong point) but what quality of video was it such that someone couldn’t tell if it was a laptop or a hard drive? In my experience hard drives are smaller; if someone couldn’t tell one from the other in a video then couldn’t the item have been something else, a phone or a book.

    (I’m not suggesting that Pelosi’s laptop wasn’t stolen.)

    • John Paul Jones says:

      In the video which shows her leaving, there is clearly something bulky and slightly awkward in her bag, as you can see by the way it swings. But whatever the object is, it doesn’t appear to have the contours of a magazine-sized flattish object (ie, laptop), but seems more box-like. Of course, motion makes things look different than they are when static, so this could be totally wrong. Plus, you would have to put the video into a window where you could slow it down and go frame-by-frame to be sure, which I don’t know how to do with twitter videos.

  7. BobCon says:

    I hope the implication of Pelosi’s openness about the laptop means they know it’s not important — it was just being used for things like video chats with constituents or writing press releases, and they have secured their networks in the aftermath and were using good encryption and passwords on the laptop in the first place.

    If she is revealing the theft before things are locked down and audited, that’s a problem.

    • Duke says:

      Given the recent breach in networks of the government, I suspect there was plenty of useful information potential.

      If they were smart, they would have destroyed it by now.

      I am more worried about those smart enough to do something with it quickly and destroy the physical evidence.

    • Spencer Dawkins says:

      I saw a report about SOME stolen laptop (nobody said Pelosi’s laptop was the only one stolen) that was only used for presentations. Assuming happy thoughts about things like OneDrive or whatever shared file system Congress uses might be, the laptops COULD be “thin clients”, with very little on local storage that you’d have when you carried it off (and, again thinking happy thoughts, were unable to reconnect to one of the networks in the capitol building).

      Or maybe the laptop had the userid and password on a sticky note attached to the cover, and whatever hardware login device attached to the laptop case (I’ve seen both in business settings), and we are in a world of hurt.

      I guess we’ll see.

      • P J Evans says:

        I’d hope that whoever used it had their password memorized and didn’t need a note – and also that as soon as they reported it missing, it was removed from the network.

  8. pdaly says:

    The timeline in the arrest affidavit for when Williams ditched her cell phone seems confusing, unless Jan 6 is mentioned to tie it with the date of the “trumpede” of the U.S. Capitol.

    The timeline in the arrest affidavit for when Harrisburg law enforcement watched Williams on mother’s phone is implied to be January 11, 2021, but it is not explicit.

    quote: “Sometime after January 6, 2021, WILLIAMS changed her telephone number and deleted what I believe were her social media accounts”.

    Did WILLIAMS wait until Jan 11, 2021 to change her number?
    Or did her mother call a NEW number when she had officers present on January (11th? later than 11th?)

    quote: “WILLIAMS’ mother, with [Harrisburg law enforcement?]officers present, used her cell phone to place a video-enabled phone call to WILLIAMS. Officers observed WILLIAMS on her mother’s cell phone screen and noted that WILLIAMS was wearing a brown-colored jacket, consistent with the screenshots above.”

  9. poppagenoux says:

    Couple of comments. If the laptop contained saved passwords, we have to assume every network it connected to has been compromised. The fact that she was heading out with the laptop as others were heading in, suggests that she had a mission and accomplished it and wanted to get out before reinforcements arrived. If she had a mission, that suggests that the chaos was a cover for some planned hits, which in turn suggests that there were more objectives than Pelosi’s laptop, and more operatives than this woman. If she did take a laptop, the contents might have been mirrored in a matter of seconds and it wouldn’t matter if she subsequently destroyed it. All of the above are very bad, but the worst is the implication that there were multiple planned thefts. and someone/some entity with objectives beyond disruption of the electoral vote count.

    • BroD says:

      “The fact that she was heading out with the laptop as others were heading in, suggests that she had a mission and accomplished it and wanted to get out before reinforcements arrived. If she had a mission, that suggests that the chaos was a cover for some planned hits.”
      Yes I agree.

    • P J Evans says:

      It would depend a lot on how it was set up. AFAIK, the saved passwords aren’t easily accessible, except for those saved in the browser. (It would also depend on what it was used for.) I know that at work, we were forced to change passwords every three months, and changing some of them usually required going through the unhelpful desk. (They were actually good at it, but it was annoying to have to call for something that wasn’t our fault.)

      • PhoneInducedPinkEye says:

        They probably, hopefully, had competent admins and enforced policies to avoid that missing laptop being too big of a deal, security wise.

        If the laptop was still powered and maintained its contents in RAM long enough for someone to dump it, that would be a slightly bigger deal.

    • crowshun says:

      I also saw her on the WaPo live video that day. Their camera was trained on a main door where rioters were streaming out of the building. They were all following the same direction when they emerged, drifting towards the left. Then she came out and turned sharply right, hugging the building and walking briskly. She caught my attention because she seemed professionally dressed, completely unlike the MAGA-hatted riffraff. I thought at the time she might be a spy who had infiltrated the mob. (And no, I didn’t notice if she had anything in her hands.)

    • Ravenclaw says:

      Speaker Pelosi has stated that the laptop in question was used only for presentations – which makes sense if it was just lying around the office. And if that is the case, then no wonder the alleged deal to sell it to Russian intelligence fell through! No compromat, no passwords, just a bunch of snooze-inducing PowerPoint slideshows…

  10. graham firchlis says:

    How certain is it that Riley Jean is a recent hardcore convert? Perhaps she’s been deeply involved for some long time, and Mom is only recently aware. She wouldn’t be the first clueless parent, and it would be consistent with her protective stance.

    Daddy is far more problematic. Hard to believe tbat a 22 year old still tightly bound to her parents who just sacked the US Congress, surely the most exciting event of her young life, spent the 2 1/2 drive back to Harrisburg without telling all to her Trump-sympathetic parent.

    What did Father know, and when did he know it?

    • madwand says:

      He might have had balls but greeted at the airport after circling for an hour waiting for permission to land, and permission to arrest I would think, which is what happened. He’ll be detained for thirty days which is a lot of time to be served a novachok sandwich, or have a heart attack or both.

  11. Norskeflamthrower says:

    These new American Nazis (same as the old ones) appear to be all in on the destabilization of government functioning going forward. And we can now see plainly the relationship between American oligarchs, elected political officials and the Russians at levels that should frighten everyone in the country. And to all those trolls out there who have been questioning whether large portions of our police are in fact new Nazis or Nazi sympathizers: bite me. And of course now we have the new administration trying to vet 20,000 enlisted troops called up to protect the government and the inauguration in less than a full week. What could possibly go wrong??!!!

      • Norskeflamthrower says:

        Yeah, the DOD or FBI or…name the tune, because the point is there is absolutely no way of knowing how far the decomposition of our government has gone until, of course, 36 or so hours from now.

      • Stacey says:

        Frank Figluzzi said on MSNBC show earlier that there’s no way the FBI is able to do more than a watch list check and arrest record. He was a former assistant director for counterintelligence at the FBI, so I feel confidant in his analysis on this, but honestly logic gets you to the same place. “Vetting” 25,000 National Guardsmen in 3 days? Sure, ok.

        My Reservist husband and I were remarking how utterly insane it is that soldiers leave with ANY gear or uniforms at all when they discharge and that Army Surplus stores are a thing, for exactly this type of reason. Scary shit, indeed!

        • skua says:

          There are plenty of countries where being part of a groups with guns that is based on “resistin’ the govmint” would be identify a person as being a potential security threat.
          If that hasn’t been obvious to US security authorities over the past 2 years then they aren’t fit to do their job. if that job involves recognizing emerging threats.

  12. Kevin Hayden says:

    If we assume the dumped lover is close to the truth,

    1) Was she recently ‘radicalized’ by an online friend or off?
    2) Or was she recruited by a foreign intel service?
    3) Her Dad, for example, could be the chief radicalizer for her.
    4) Giving direction to the office either means she had a tour OR was passed the information by others, online or off.
    5) Aware of the crowd headed to the Capitol, several far more dangerous intel and military could easily infiltrate with specific missions. Not just Putin’s bois, but Atomwaffen. Just saying.
    6) Haven’t heard word of anyone apprehended for the three planted IEDs either. That dude seems to have concealed himself well other than his shoes.
    &) Logic suggests Pelosi has no classified intel on her laptop, though, If it’s only useful to inflict political damage on her, assistance would more likely come from radical righties on the hill than outside actors.

    • subtropolis says:

      I am open to the suggestion that she was moving with purpose to the Speaker’s offices, and even that she was on a mission. But it also could be that she happened to be among the group which happened to go up those particular steps to come across those particular offices. It was a mob moving in several directions, after all.

      That said, I am already convinced that certain actors were there that day with the specific intent to act under the cover of the mob. There’s still lots more to uncover about this.

    • PeterS says:

      Charges: “Knowingly Entering or Remaining in any Restricted Building or Grounds Without Lawful Authority; Violent Entry and Disorderly Conduct on Capitol Grounds”

      I still don’t see how the laptop/hard drive story can derive from the alleged viewing of a video, given the apparent difference in size. I must be missing something.

  13. fflambeau says:

    The obvious point: check her name and identiy including photos with those who took “tours” beforehand. Note none of that information has been released.

    It would seem she knew where she was going and had a target. Making a big of money on the side probably was her own idea.

  14. John says:

    I don’t know… I immediately thought of the movie Burn After Reading when I first heard about this story…

  15. Anthony says:

    Hi [content removed]

    [Welcome to emptywheel, but NO. We do not allow sharing of personal information here, do not ask for it. That goes for anybody else even thinking about it. /~Rayne]

Comments are closed.