Yesterday, a news story revealed that Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio was an FBI informant. Immediately, I thought that what would be interesting is to suggest to all QAnon followers that perhaps "Q" has long been an FBI informant, because that would be SO "dark state" of the FBI, wouldn't it? Co-opting "Q," which would mean that they all were at risk. They couldn't even trust "Q" anymore. Or the Proud Boys. After all, everything about them could be a deep state plot!!
And the more I thought about that, the more I realized that what I'd most love is for a reporter to ask a spokesperson for FBI if "Q" is an FBI informant, too. Of course, the Bureau wouldn't comment on who informants are, but that question and its "no comment" answer would be on video -- in fact, the FBI could even put out a press release reiterating that they don't comment on such things. But it would all build on the Proud Boys revelation and raise a "deep state" conspiracy theory. And the problem for QAnon followers is that not only are they predisposed to believe any negative story about the government and any conspiracy that involves politics -- and this rumor would have a serious foundation in addition to all that since the Proud Boys leader was actually revealed as an FBI informant -- but, and this is the most important thing, there would be no way to refute it, which would only add fuel to the conspiracy fear. With other such stories, the person in question can always deny the charge. The Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio, for instance, said that "I don't know any of this. I don't recall any of this." (Which, you have to admit, is comically weak as far as denials go, especially for a domestic terrorist.) The problem for him though is that being quoted works both ways, and a former federal prosecutor Vanessa Singh Johannes said in a court hearing that, in fact, Tarrio "cooperated with local and federal law enforcement," Worse for Tarrio, an FBI agent at the hearing added that the Proud Boys leader was a “key component” in local police investigations." .And while his staunchest supporters could dismiss that as being how "the deep state" operates," the worse thing for Tarrio in his "Um, er, wait, really?" denial is that his own lawyer at the time Jeffrey Feiler said in court at the hearing that his client had indeed helped out in many investigations by going undercover and was a "prolific" cooperator. And added that his client “at his own risk, in an undercover role met and negotiated to pay $11,000 to members of that ring to bring in fictitious family members of his from another country,” So, Tarrio is pretty much in trouble when the Proud Boys have their next meeting. But an anonymous "Q"? There's no way an anonymous denial would even be as substantial as the empty, flailing words of Enrique Tarrio. I can just imagine the new story -- "'Oh, no, I'm not an FBI informant,' said the anonymous 'Q'" in a statement that he, she or they released to the press. When con man Clifford Irving famously faked an as-told-to memoir of the Howard Hughes, he was certain that the reclusive Hughes would not surface. And though the mega-billionaire did not surface in person, what Irving didn't count on was Hughes making a conference phone call to several journalists who had known and who who could question him on personal details to verify that he was, in fact, Howard Hughes. But "Q" can't do even that. Since he, she or they is (or are) totally anonymous, there's no one who could verify anything about the denials. It would be quite the conundrum. I'm sure that many QAnon believers would deny that any such a story could possibly be true -- but I'm equally sure that since it could, of course, possibly be true, most especially with an anonymous leader and with the leader of the Proud Boys being revealed to be an FBI informant, it would send many of the cult into disarray and anguish since they are so deeply ingrained to believe any government conspiracy. This all becomes all the more important given the DHS advisory that was released yesterday about the possibility of major threats from domestic terrorists for the next few months -- many of whom, the advisory notes, are angry at the election results. So, gee, one wonders where-oh-where in the world could that have come from??! And yes, that's today's Republican Party, and this connection to violence is the foundation of fascism. And it is not shocking at all to hear the deafening silence from Republicans about the report. So, if something as simple, as basic as merely asking a question about whether the "Q" leader of QAnon is an FBI informant can cause any disarray in the conspiracy cult, all the better. And the reality is...I have no idea if "Q" is an FBI informant or not. For all I know, he, she or they is/are. I have absolutely no idea in the world about the identify of "Q," and neither does most any member of the conspiracy cult. So, suggesting that the person or persons unknown might possibly be an FBI informant is a totally reasonable question to ask. Hey, if a science fiction writer can develop a fake religion on a lark and convince masses that Scientology is real, there's no reason to believe almost anything is possible in who came up with leading an anonymous cult conspiracy. So, gee, I mean, I really do want to know -- is "Q" an FBI informant? Well, either that, or Trump's 400-pound kid living in his parents' basement. It's possible. Or hey, who knows, maybe even both! Or a Russian troll. For that matter, why not it all? A 400-pound Russian troll living in his parent's basement who is an FBI informant. And given the lunacy of the conspiracies, it's actually not that outlandish to think it's so. But first, as a starting point -- is "Q" an FBI informant?
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorRobert J. Elisberg is a political commentator, screenwriter, novelist, tech writer and also some other things that I just tend to keep forgetting. Feedspot Badge of Honor
Categories
All
|
© Copyright Robert J. Elisberg 2024
|