Senators Call for Clarity on Untasked Agents’ Presence During January 6 Events

Senators Call for Clarity on Untasked Agents’ Presence During January 6 Events

EXCLUSIVE: Senators Ron Johnson and Chuck Grassley are questioning the Department of Justice’s inspector general about the involvement of unassigned or “untasked” confidential human sources from DOJ agencies, other than the FBI, during the January 6, 2021, Capitol riots.

Recent disclosures from DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz indicated that more than two dozen FBI confidential human sources were present in the vicinity of the Capitol on that day. However, only three were officially designated by the bureau to be in attendance.

Among those three, one source entered the Capitol building while the other two were within the restricted area surrounding it. Typically, if a confidential human source is tasked to attend an event, they receive compensation from the FBI for their time and activities.

Undertones of Inquisitiveness from Lawmakers

In December, following Horowitz’s report, Senators Grassley and Johnson formally sought clarity on whether confidential human sources from other DOJ divisions were deployed on January 6. The senators’ inquiries underline significant concerns regarding the role of various federal agencies during the Capitol protests.

On April 7, Horowitz shared findings with the senators indicating that his investigations revealed no evidence suggesting that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, the Drug Enforcement Administration, or the Bureau of Prisons had deployed any confidential human sources to Washington, D.C., on January 6.

“We can confirm that the ATF, DEA, USMS, and BOP did not have any undercover employees in Washington, D.C. on January 6 in connection with the Capitol events,” Horowitz wrote in his findings. “This includes individuals in or around the Capitol or within the restricted areas.”

Questions About Untasked Sources Remain

While Horowitz’s report provided firm declarations about the absence of tasked sources from certain agencies, he could not ascertain whether any untasked confidential human sources—those who may have traveled to the area on their own accord—were present on January 6.

“In contrast to the FBI’s efforts, we lack information regarding whether the ATF, DEA, USMS, or BOP conducted follow-up investigations to determine if any of their confidential human sources went to D.C. independently on that day,” Horowitz stated.

During discussions with Senate staff, Horowitz noted that the inspector general’s office is pursuing additional inquiries with the mentioned agencies to ascertain whether they can locate any untasked sources who may have been in the capital region during the January 6 events.

Horowitz assured the senators that he would provide updates as more information becomes available regarding this critical aspect of the investigation.

Commitment to Oversight by Lawmakers

Senators Grassley and Johnson expressed concerns within a letter addressed to Horowitz, asserting that his investigations seemed predominantly focused on the FBI’s engagement of confidential sources. They described his conclusions about untasked agents from other DOJ components as less definitive.

Furthermore, the senators have reiterated their request for additional information, emphasizing that the term “undercover agent” encompasses various interpretations. They are now calling for insights into whether any federal law enforcement component had operatives or contractors in civilian attire present in the D.C. area, at the Capitol Building, or restricted areas during January 6.

Broader Implications for Law Enforcement Transparency

In their December inquiries, Grassley and Johnson also pressed for assurance that Horowitz thoroughly reviewed both classified and unclassified communications between the confidential human sources and their handlers to avoid critical oversights in understanding the events surrounding January 6.

During his recent communications with the senators, Horowitz declared that he had scrutinized relevant files within the FBI’s electronic system. He noted the acquisition of pertinent emails documenting interactions between the FBI’s Washington Field Office and handlers of tasked confidential human sources.

“We flagged certain documents to be produced, including 1023s, evidence of unauthorized illegal activities, and other relevant communications between sources and their handlers,” Horowitz explained.

Grassley and Johnson, however, pointed out that there was a gap in Horowitz’s review, voicing concerns about not ensuring the examination of all text messages exchanged between the 26 confidential human sources and their handlers.

Seeking Accountability and Transparency

Both senators continue to advocate for comprehensive transparency regarding the Justice Department’s operational involvement in the events of January 6. In a joint statement, they expressed their expectation that Inspector General Horowitz should diligently illuminate all areas within the department’s purview, demanding accountability and clarity.

Grassley and Johnson insisted that it is vital for the American public to receive full transparency regarding the extent and nature of the Justice Department’s actions during one of the most turbulent days in recent U.S. history.

“It’s time the public gains complete clarity regarding the Justice Department and its various agents’ involvement in January 6,” they stated in their communication with Fox News Digital. They further urged Horowitz to finalize the investigation and comprehensively respond to their inquiries.

As of now, a spokesperson for Horowitz has yet to respond to requests for comment regarding this pressing issue.